From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-renesas-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-it0-f67.google.com ([209.85.214.67]:35534 "EHLO
        mail-it0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752387AbdLNONd (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 14 Dec 2017 09:13:33 -0500
Received: by mail-it0-f67.google.com with SMTP id f143so11413464itb.0
        for <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 06:13:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXqK4QA=rqWpBMPmXY7vb2Feoncb4wym0C9y7tvV71zBw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1510588003-16650-1-git-send-email-ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
 <1510588003-16650-3-git-send-email-ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
 <1926914.PsNMcYBlGW@aspire.rjw.lan> <CAMuHMdUE+fdbS+HDxbcWNHaTZubnrQ7ai4bkOsBpLriG1y-gZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPDyKFoAY7yZJz9obke5DeqadpqJ0MEKPQJvxibpq85f+==BBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdXk9GaExvYbdSfV0bf4Kh1TNrZDKtAfTDaDfWFMvk6Snw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPDyKFoey_kSf0OE7OmHCX4H4VFQcWOU6NE4suZ9=9stZVQNpQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMuHMdXqK4QA=rqWpBMPmXY7vb2Feoncb4wym0C9y7tvV71zBw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:13:32 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFpFiBbuC6vhv4-gA+WOy2igwSZzZXtN9a9sH-f6FSWwWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] PM / core: Add IN_BAND_WAKEUP driver flag
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
        Niklas Soderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-renesas-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-renesas-soc.vger.kernel.org>

On 14 December 2017 at 11:52, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Hi Ulf,
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 11 December 2017 at 11:48, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> On 10 December 2017 at 11:16, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>>>>> To complicate matters, some drivers may be used on SoCs where the device
>>>>> needs to be kept running (clock and/or power domain), and on SoCs where the
>>>>> device is always running. This difference is typically handled by genpd,
>>>>> and the device driver may not even be aware. Of course the driver can just
>>>>> set IN_BAND_WAKEUP regardless, (else it has to check for the presence of
>>>>> clocks and/or power-domains properties itself, duplicating genpd
>>>>> core/driver code).
>>>>>
>>>>> So what about
>>>>>
>>>>>          if (IN_BAND_WAKEUP ||
>>>>>             (GENPD_FLAG_ACTIVE_WAKEUP && !OUT_BAND_WAKEUP)) {
>>>>
>>>> We don't want to suspend the device in case of IN_BAND_WAKEUP, right!?
>>>>
>>>>>                 ... suspend device...
>>>>>         }
>>>
>>> Oops, inverted logic. I should not write technical emails on Sunday morning.
>>>
>>> Yes, the device must be kept awake if either IN_BAND_WAKEUP is set, or
>>> if GENPD_FLAG_ACTIVE_WAKEUP is set but OUT_BAND_WAKEUP isn't.
>>
>> Putting together the pieces of information received here, you have
>> convinced me that we should stick to use the current
>> GENPD_FLAG_ACTIVE_WAKEUP for now, which allows genpds to opt-in for
>> start dealing with in-band-wakeups.
>
> Thank you!
>
> So I'll move forward with "[PATCH v2 0/3] PM / Domain: renesas: Fix active
> wakeup behavior"
> (https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-renesas-soc/msg19941.html)

Yes! I just added my reviewed-by tag to these.

Kind regards
Uffe