Re: [PATCH v7 16/20] arm64: tegra: Enable wake from deep sleep on RTC alarm

[Sowjanya Komatineni]

On 8/1/19 3:43 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 01.08.2019 0:08, Sowjanya Komatineni ÐÐÑÐÑ:
> > On 7/31/19 4:04 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > > 31.07.2019 3:20, Sowjanya Komatineni ÐÐÑÐÑ:
> > > > This patch updates device tree for RTC and PMC to allow system wake
> > > > from deep sleep on RTC alarm.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  Â arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210.dtsi | 5 ++++-
> > > >  Â 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210.dtsi
> > > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210.dtsi
> > > > index 659753118e96..30a7c48385a2 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210.dtsi
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210.dtsi
> > > > @@ -768,7 +768,8 @@
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂ rtc@7000e000 {
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ compatible = "nvidia,tegra210-rtc", "nvidia,tegra20-rtc";
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ reg = <0x0 0x7000e000 0x0 0x100>;
> > > > -ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 2 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ interrupts = <16 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ interrupt-parent = <&pmc>;
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ clocks = <&tegra_car TEGRA210_CLK_RTC>;
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ clock-names = "rtc";
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂ };
> > > > @@ -778,6 +779,8 @@
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ reg = <0x0 0x7000e400 0x0 0x400>;
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ clocks = <&tegra_car TEGRA210_CLK_PCLK>, <&clk32k_in>;
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ clock-names = "pclk", "clk32k_in";
> > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ interrupt-controller;
> > > >  Â ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ powergates {
> > > >  ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ pd_audio: aud {
> > > Is this a backwards-compatible change? Or it's not really worth to care
> > > about the compatibility with older kernel versions, I'm not sure about
> > > overall state of T210 in the upstream kernel.
> > I don't think its required to be backwards-compatible as SC7 entry/exit
> > implementation for T210 is with this patch series onwards..
> The new device tree binary should work with older kernel versions, AFAIK
> this is the upstream rule. But if kernel support isn't in a very good
> shape and not much people are using it, then obviously it is not very
> important.

Yes, my response to backwards-compatible was with respect to interrupt 
parent change as this will not be backward compatible and also there is 
no Tegra210 suspend/resume earlier. Other functionality wise, it is 
backward compatible.