linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] pmdomain: ti_sci: add wakeup constraint management

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPDyKFpH9TQ3P75CXxHmgo+y8z-C_iYCzFzqR93w1Mt9jhFBBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 13:31:41 +0200
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>, 
	Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>, Akashdeep Kaur <a-kaur@...com>, Sebin Francis <sebin.francis@...com>, 
	Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@...libre.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] pmdomain: ti_sci: add wakeup constraint management

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 02:00, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com> wrote:
>
> During system-wide suspend, check all devices connected to PM domain
> to see if they are wakeup-enabled.  If so, set a TI SCI device
> constraint.
>
> Note: DM firmware clears all constraints on resume.
>
> Co-developed-by: Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>
> Signed-off-by: Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
> ---
>  drivers/pmdomain/ti/ti_sci_pm_domains.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pmdomain/ti/ti_sci_pm_domains.c b/drivers/pmdomain/ti/ti_sci_pm_domains.c
> index 963272fa387b..8af907579152 100644
> --- a/drivers/pmdomain/ti/ti_sci_pm_domains.c
> +++ b/drivers/pmdomain/ti/ti_sci_pm_domains.c
> @@ -76,6 +76,23 @@ static int ti_sci_pd_set_lat_constraint(struct device *dev, s32 val)
>         return ret;
>  }
>
> +static inline bool ti_sci_pd_set_wkup_constraint(struct device *dev)
> +{

Similar comment as for patch1, should this be a static void intstead?

> +       struct generic_pm_domain *genpd = pd_to_genpd(dev->pm_domain);
> +       struct ti_sci_pm_domain *pd = genpd_to_ti_sci_pd(genpd);
> +       const struct ti_sci_handle *ti_sci = pd->parent->ti_sci;
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       if (device_may_wakeup(dev)) {
> +               ret = ti_sci->ops.pm_ops.set_device_constraint(ti_sci, pd->idx,
> +                                                              TISCI_MSG_CONSTRAINT_SET);
> +               if (!ret)
> +                       dev_dbg(dev, "ti_sci_pd: ID:%d set device constraint.\n", pd->idx);
> +       }
> +
> +       return true;
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * ti_sci_pd_power_off(): genpd power down hook
>   * @domain: pointer to the powerdomain to power off
> @@ -117,6 +134,8 @@ static int ti_sci_pd_suspend(struct device *dev)
>         if (ti_sci_pd_is_valid_constraint(val))
>                 ti_sci_pd_set_lat_constraint(dev, val);
>
> +       ti_sci_pd_set_wkup_constraint(dev);
> +
>         return 0;
>  }
>
>
> --
> 2.46.0
>

Kind regards
Uffe