From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
mark.rutland@arm.com, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, will@kernel.org,
yj.chiang@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Kconfig: Add SYS_SUPPORTS_APM_EMULATION
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:49:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201217164911.GB20278@gaia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201216164147.9854-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:41:47AM +0800, Lecopzer Chen wrote:
> so there is two points
> 1. out-of-tree function can't be approved
> I totally agree with this :) so we may have a driver upstream in the future.
It may not be upstreamable if it relies on the old APM interface ;).
> 2. APM not make sense on arm64
> Could you please let me konw the reason why APM on ARM64 doesn't make sense?
It's a very old interface, even on x86 it is disabled in the distro
kernels. There are more modern alternatives and you should update your
driver and user space to use them (e.g. /sys/power/).
--
Catalin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, yj.chiang@mediatek.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
matthias.bgg@gmail.com, will@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Kconfig: Add SYS_SUPPORTS_APM_EMULATION
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:49:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201217164911.GB20278@gaia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201216164147.9854-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:41:47AM +0800, Lecopzer Chen wrote:
> so there is two points
> 1. out-of-tree function can't be approved
> I totally agree with this :) so we may have a driver upstream in the future.
It may not be upstreamable if it relies on the old APM interface ;).
> 2. APM not make sense on arm64
> Could you please let me konw the reason why APM on ARM64 doesn't make sense?
It's a very old interface, even on x86 it is disabled in the distro
kernels. There are more modern alternatives and you should update your
driver and user space to use them (e.g. /sys/power/).
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, yj.chiang@mediatek.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
matthias.bgg@gmail.com, will@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Kconfig: Add SYS_SUPPORTS_APM_EMULATION
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:49:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201217164911.GB20278@gaia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201216164147.9854-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:41:47AM +0800, Lecopzer Chen wrote:
> so there is two points
> 1. out-of-tree function can't be approved
> I totally agree with this :) so we may have a driver upstream in the future.
It may not be upstreamable if it relies on the old APM interface ;).
> 2. APM not make sense on arm64
> Could you please let me konw the reason why APM on ARM64 doesn't make sense?
It's a very old interface, even on x86 it is disabled in the distro
kernels. There are more modern alternatives and you should update your
driver and user space to use them (e.g. /sys/power/).
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-17 16:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-24 9:01 [PATCH] arm64: Kconfig: Add SYS_SUPPORTS_APM_EMULATION Lecopzer Chen
2020-11-24 9:01 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-11-24 9:01 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-11-25 10:36 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-25 10:36 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-25 10:36 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-25 11:41 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-11-25 11:41 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-11-25 11:41 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-16 15:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-16 15:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-16 15:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-16 16:41 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-16 16:41 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-16 16:41 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-17 16:49 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2020-12-17 16:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-17 16:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-18 5:02 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-18 5:02 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-18 5:02 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-14 9:28 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-14 9:28 ` Lecopzer Chen
2020-12-14 9:28 ` Lecopzer Chen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201217164911.GB20278@gaia \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yj.chiang@mediatek.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.