[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230208151939.meya6c5gayspvmtr@kazuki-mac>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 00:19:39 +0900
From: Kazuki <kazukih0205@...il.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Hector Martin <marcan@...can.st>,
Sven Peter <sven@...npeter.dev>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: s2idle breaks on machines without cpuidle support
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 03:03:06PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 11:43:27PM +0900, Kazuki wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 02:16:58PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > I was about ask you earlier as why can't you implement just system
> > > suspend in PSCI where the last cpu just calls WFI if you are interested
> > > in system sleep state. Or you can implement CPU_SUSPEND with an additional
> > > retention state which enters PSCI implementation just to make sure there is
> > > an active cpuidle driver and the s2idle state machinery works as expected.
> >
> > The machine I have (Macbook with Apple M1) doesn't have PSCI.
>
> Well, if we are allowing to boot on such a system, then we must allow
> adding a platform specific idle driver. It may be useful once we info
> to add deeper than WFI states.
Hmmm, I thought for arm64, non-PSCI idle drivers were prohibited? Or am
I mistaken here?
>
> > I guess we should ensure that systems without a cpuidle driver
> > will not suspend maybe around here then.
> >
>
> Are we ? I thought were making changes to enable it. Or are you saying
> we allow to enter into such a state and render the system unusable, if
> so we need to fix it.
Both as I mentioned in my first email. Apologies if it turned out to
be confusing.
Thanks,
Kazuki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists