[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <161871128938.46595.8658084266884500136@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 19:01:29 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
ulf.hansson@...aro.org
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, agross@...nel.org, ohad@...ery.com,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dianders@...omium.org, rishabhb@...eaurora.org,
sidgup@...eaurora.org, Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/12] soc: qcom: aoss: Drop power domain support
Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-04-16 05:03:48)
> The load state resources are expected to follow the life cycle of the
> remote processor it tracks. However, modeling load state resources as
> power-domains result in them getting turned off during system suspend
> and thereby falling out of sync with the remote processors that are still
> on. Fix this by replacing load state resource control through the generic
> qmp message send interface instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>
> ---
Is it possible to keep this code around for a cycle so that there isn't
the chance that someone is using the deprecated DT bindings with a new
kernel? I worry that ripping the code out will cause them angst.
Certainly we have to keep the code in place until DT is updated, so this
patch should come last?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists