From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 16:15:03 +0800 Message-ID: <20120907081501.GA17749@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1346412846-17102-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <1346412846-17102-2-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <201209061614.54022.heiko@sntech.de> <1887927.1deN8M9siP@percival> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1887927.1deN8M9siP@percival> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alex Courbot Cc: Heiko =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= , Stephen Warren , Thierry Reding , Simon Glass , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Anton Vorontsov , David Woodhouse , Arnd Bergmann , Leela Krishna Amudala , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 05:04:24PM +0900, Alex Courbot wrote: > If e.g. the power on sequence fails at step N (of M steps for that sequence), > one could try playing the corresponding power off sequence (either completely > of from step M - N), but then again we cannot rely on sequences to be > perfectly symetrical. Maybe this is more something for the calling driver to > check for and control? That had been my thought too - depending on what the sequence is for it may be that the corrective action is something very different to reversing the sequence, for example a device reset may be required. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 08:15:03 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences Message-Id: <20120907081501.GA17749@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> List-Id: References: <1346412846-17102-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <1346412846-17102-2-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <201209061614.54022.heiko@sntech.de> <1887927.1deN8M9siP@percival> In-Reply-To: <1887927.1deN8M9siP@percival> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Alex Courbot Cc: Heiko =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= , Stephen Warren , Thierry Reding , Simon Glass , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Anton Vorontsov , David Woodhouse , Arnd Bergmann , Leela Krishna Amudala , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 05:04:24PM +0900, Alex Courbot wrote: > If e.g. the power on sequence fails at step N (of M steps for that sequence), > one could try playing the corresponding power off sequence (either completely > of from step M - N), but then again we cannot rely on sequences to be > perfectly symetrical. Maybe this is more something for the calling driver to > check for and control? That had been my thought too - depending on what the sequence is for it may be that the corrective action is something very different to reversing the sequence, for example a device reset may be required.