[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZJq/zgFC+O2MoiEw@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2023 13:54:06 +0300
From: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
avel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Taniya Das <tdas@....qualcomm.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] PM: domains: Allow devices attached to genpd to
be managed by HW
On 23-06-27 12:46:28, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 01:40:32PM +0300, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
> >
> > Some power-domains may be capable of relying on the HW to control the power
> > for a device that's hooked up to it. Typically, for these kinds of
> > configurations the device doesn't really need to be attached to a PM domain
> > (genpd), from Linux point of view. However, in some cases the behaviour of
> > the power-domain and its device can be changed in runtime.
> >
> > To allow a consumer driver to change the behaviour of the PM domain for its
> > device, let's provide a new function, dev_pm_genpd_set_hwmode(). Moreover,
> > let's add a corresponding optional genpd callback, ->set_hwmode_dev(),
> > which the genpd provider should implement if it can support switching
> > between HW controlled mode and SW controlled mode.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
>
> You can't forward on a patch from someone else without also adding your
> signed-off-by on it, right?
Oups, forgot to add it. Will do in the next version.
>
> Also, why is this a RFC series? What is left to do with it to get it
> into a state which you feel comfortable having us review it "for real"?
There is a bit of back story here. This HW control support is something
that Qualcomm platforms support for some of the PDs. Sent this as RFC
as I thought it might open up a discussion of such a generic need at
first. But now that I think of it, it might've been a non-RFC patch as
well.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists