From: Stephen Boyd <email@example.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Sibi Sankar <email@example.com>,
Deepak Kumar Singh <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Andy Gross <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 1/1] soc: qcom: smp2p: Add wakeup capability to SMP2P IRQ
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 21:25:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAE-0n51+t6ATCcDgfKeMyh0f0p0=otnUmBjChViX-r3qJYfhZg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2021-08-10 16:11:10)
> On Tue 10 Aug 14:18 CDT 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-08-10 10:24:32)
> > > On 2021-08-09 23:28, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > Quoting Deepak Kumar Singh (2021-08-09 04:05:08)
> > > >>
> > > >> On 8/6/2021 1:10 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > >> > Quoting Deepak Kumar Singh (2021-08-05 09:17:33)
> > > >> >> Some use cases require SMP2P interrupts to wake up the host
> > > >> >> from suspend.
> > > >> > Please elaborate on this point so we understand what sort of scenarios
> > > >> > want to wakeup from suspend.
> > > >>
> > > >> Once such scenario is where WiFi/modem crashes and notifies crash to
> > > >> local host through smp2p
> > > >>
> > > >> if local host is in suspend it should wake up to handle the crash and
> > > >> reboot the WiFi/modem.
> > > >
> > > > Does anything go wrong if the firmware crashes during suspend and the
> > > > local host doesn't handle it until it wakes for some other reason? I'd
> > > > like to understand if the crash handling can be delayed/combined with
> > > > another wakeup.
> > >
> > > If the modem firmware crashes
> > > during suspend, the system comes
> > > out of xo-shutdown and AFAIK stays
> > > there until we handle the interrupt.
> > >
> > So you're saying we waste power if we don't wakeup the AP and leave the
> > SoC in a shallow low power state? That would be good to have indicated
> > in the code via a comment and in the commit text so we know that we want
> > to handle the wakeup by default.
> Sounds like in a system without autosleep (or userspace equivalent) it
> would be desirable to leave the SoC in this lower state than to wake up
> the system handle the crash and then just idle?
> But leaving the system in this state will result in you missing your
> important phone calls...
Yes I think we should just add a comment to the code and commit text and
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-11 4:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-05 16:17 [PATCH V1 1/1] soc: qcom: smp2p: Add wakeup capability to SMP2P IRQ Deepak Kumar Singh
2021-08-05 19:40 ` Stephen Boyd
2021-08-09 11:05 ` Deepak Kumar Singh
2021-08-09 17:58 ` Stephen Boyd
2021-08-10 17:24 ` Sibi Sankar
2021-08-10 19:18 ` Stephen Boyd
2021-08-10 23:11 ` Bjorn Andersson
2021-08-11 4:25 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2021-08-16 11:11 ` Deepak Kumar Singh
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).