All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
To: balbi@ti.com
Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, khilman@deeprootsystems.com,
	paul@pwsan.com, tony@atomide.com, sourav.poddar@ti.com,
	vaibhav.bedia@ti.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/2] SERIAL: OMAP: Remove idle handling from driver
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:55:33 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5122019D.9030100@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130218101113.GB32688@arwen.pp.htv.fi>

On Monday 18 February 2013 03:41 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:10:32PM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>> HWMOD_SWSUP_SIDLE flag will is not what will help UART completely.
>>> Also considering UART also needs async wakeup enabled as it implements
>>> another such hook and attaches that through function pointer.
>>
>> this is exactly what I said at [1], which I quote:
>>
>> "Also, $SUBJECT isn't improving the situation regarding UART Wakeup,
>> there is still the regression of UART never being wakeup capable.
>>
I also mentioned that am not touching the wakeup function pointer. The
reason an alternate is needed because wakeup function pointer back-end
comes in between. And the existing SW control flag isn't intended
completely for the purpose what we wanted to use for uart. And I didn't
expected the wakeup crap will come in between an implementation of just
slave idle bits.

>> I wonder what are your ideas to sort that part out, I mean, how do you
>> plan to implement ->set_wake() for the tty port ?"
>
> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=136093334914275&w=2
>
The main need for uart wakeup is the io_ring() trigger and that needs
to happen via generic pin control API. SYSC wakeup bit isn't something
needs to be toggled so that can be decoupled. So again the idea is
to make SYSC handling transparent to UART drivers and let driver toggle
the io_ring() based on ->set_wake() as it is done today.

Regards,
Santosh






WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/2] SERIAL: OMAP: Remove idle handling from driver
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:55:33 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5122019D.9030100@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130218101113.GB32688@arwen.pp.htv.fi>

On Monday 18 February 2013 03:41 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:10:32PM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>> HWMOD_SWSUP_SIDLE flag will is not what will help UART completely.
>>> Also considering UART also needs async wakeup enabled as it implements
>>> another such hook and attaches that through function pointer.
>>
>> this is exactly what I said at [1], which I quote:
>>
>> "Also, $SUBJECT isn't improving the situation regarding UART Wakeup,
>> there is still the regression of UART never being wakeup capable.
>>
I also mentioned that am not touching the wakeup function pointer. The
reason an alternate is needed because wakeup function pointer back-end
comes in between. And the existing SW control flag isn't intended
completely for the purpose what we wanted to use for uart. And I didn't
expected the wakeup crap will come in between an implementation of just
slave idle bits.

>> I wonder what are your ideas to sort that part out, I mean, how do you
>> plan to implement ->set_wake() for the tty port ?"
>
> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=136093334914275&w=2
>
The main need for uart wakeup is the io_ring() trigger and that needs
to happen via generic pin control API. SYSC wakeup bit isn't something
needs to be toggled so that can be decoupled. So again the idea is
to make SYSC handling transparent to UART drivers and let driver toggle
the io_ring() based on ->set_wake() as it is done today.

Regards,
Santosh

  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-18 10:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-15 12:06 [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/2] SERIAL: OMAP: Remove idle handling from driver Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-15 12:06 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-15 13:03 ` a0131647
2013-02-15 13:03   ` a0131647
2013-02-15 13:07   ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-15 13:07     ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-15 13:08     ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-15 13:08       ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-15 13:42       ` a0131647
2013-02-15 13:42         ` a0131647
2013-02-15 13:50         ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-15 13:50           ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-18 10:04 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-18 10:04   ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-18 10:10   ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:10     ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:11     ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:11       ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:25       ` Santosh Shilimkar [this message]
2013-02-18 10:25         ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-18 10:42         ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:42           ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:45           ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:45             ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 10:55             ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-18 10:55               ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-18 11:13               ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 11:13                 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-02-18 14:36                 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-18 14:36                   ` Santosh Shilimkar

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=5122019D.9030100@ti.com \
    --to=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
    --cc=balbi@ti.com \
    --cc=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=paul@pwsan.com \
    --cc=sourav.poddar@ti.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.com \
    --cc=vaibhav.bedia@ti.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.