Re: [PATCH 07/10] ARM: OMAP5 / DRA7: Enable CPU RET on suspend

[Nishanth Menon]

On 14:45-20140827, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 08/27/2014 02:43 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > On Wednesday 27 August 2014 03:41 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >> * Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> [140827 12:05]:
> >>> On 08/27/2014 01:58 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >>>> Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>> From: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxx>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On OMAP5 / DRA7, prevent a CPU powerdomain OFF and resulting MPU OSWR
> >>>>> and instead attempt a CPU RET and side effect, MPU RET in suspend.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxx>
> >>>>> [nm@xxxxxx: update to do save_state only on DRA7]
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-mpuss-lowpower.c |    4 ++++
> >>>>>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-wakeupgen.c      |    2 +-
> >>>>>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm44xx.c              |    9 +++++++--
> >>>>>  3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-mpuss-lowpower.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-mpuss-lowpower.c
> >>>>> index 207fce2..0d640eb 100644
> >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-mpuss-lowpower.c
> >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-mpuss-lowpower.c
> >>>>> @@ -242,6 +242,10 @@ int omap4_enter_lowpower(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int power_state)
> >>>>>  		save_state = 1;
> >>>>>  		break;
> >>>>>  	case PWRDM_POWER_RET:
> >>>>> +		if (soc_is_omap54xx() || soc_is_dra7xx()) {
> >>>>
> >>>> Aren't we trying to get away from these soc_* checks for anything other
> >>>> than init code?
> >>>
> >>> I would expect that to take place in stages as part of which the next
> >>> level of cleanup is to move PRM into drivers. Currently our wakeupgen,
> >>> prm code does have quiet a few needs of dealing with soc_is checks
> >>> primarily from having to re-architect code in two different directions
> >>> - we want to move into just one direction eventually - to prm drivers
> >>> and as less code in mach-omap2 which is already in the works.
> >>
> >> Why don't you just set some flag at init time based on the
> >> soc_is check and then test that here? That limits the use of
> >> soc_is to init code only which makes it easier to phase it
> >> out completely eventually.
> >>
> > Indeed. Infact the version of the code I tried posting last year was
> > using a flag which was initialised during init. Same can be
> > done her.
> 
> OK. will try something along that line in the next rev.


Hi,

Updated patch below:
Do let me know if this is ok with folks.

---8<----