On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 6:47 AM, Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 13:53 +0800, Leo Li wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote: >> > On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 14:11 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote: >> >> From: Wang Dongsheng <dongsheng.w...@freescale.com> >> >> >> >> Add set_pm_suspend_state & pm_suspend_state functions to set/get >> >> suspend state. When system going to sleep or deep sleep, devices >> >> can get the system suspend state(STANDBY/MEM) through pm_suspend_state >> >> function and to handle different situations. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Wang Dongsheng <dongsheng.w...@freescale.com> >> >> --- >> >> *v2* >> >> Move pm api from fsl platform to powerpc general framework. >> > >> > What is powerpc-specific about this? >> >> Generally I agree with you. But I had the discussion about this topic >> a while ago with the PM maintainer. He suggestion to go with the >> platform way. >> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/16/505 > > If what he meant was whether you could do what this patch does, then you > can answer him with, "No, because it got nacked as not being platform or > arch specific." Oh, and you're still using .valid as the hook to set > the platform state, which is awful -- I think .begin is what you want to > use.
I'm not saying the current patch is good for upstream. Actually I did say that the patch need to be updated for upstream purpose. I only meant that we discussed about having the mem/standby passed by generic kernel/power interface as you suggested internally and got an negative feedback. > > If we did it in powerpc code, then what would we do on ARM? Copy the > code? No. If you are saying that this shouldn't be done in arch/powerpc Yes. We have determined to use drivers/platform folder for the re-used code with ARM. Platform power management code will be moved there. > > Now, a more legitimate objection to putting it in generic code might be > that "standby" and "mem" are loosely defined and the knowledge of how a > driver should react to each is platform specific -- but your patch > doesn't address that. You still have the driver itself interpret what > "standby" and "mem" mean. > Yup, we will address it in next batch. - Leo _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
