Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 29 Jul 2013 02:31:25 -0700 | From | Tony Lindgren <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/4] pinctrl: Add support for additional dynamic states |
| |
* Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> [130722 16:14]: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > > > To toggle dynamic states, let's add the optional active state in > > addition to the static default state. Then if the optional active > > state is defined, we can require that idle and sleep states cover > > the same pingroups as the active state. > > OK... > > > Then let's add pinctrl_check_dynamic() and pinctrl_select_dynamic() > > to use instead of pinctrl_select() to avoid breaking existing users. > > > > With pinctrl_check_dynamic() we can check that idle and sleep states > > match the active state for pingroups during init, and don't need to > > do it during runtime. > > I do not understand why this complexity need to be exposed outside > of the subsystem.
Unfortunately it's mostly to deal with supporting the current behaviour of pinctrl_select_state() which is not quite suitable for runtime PM.
> pinctrl_select_state() and the PM accessors are enough IMO. Why > should say a driver care about whether it is dynamic or not?
I think we can make this all transparent to the consumer drivers for runtime PM. Basically drivers/base/pinctrl.c needs these for the checks because of the current pinctrl_select_state().
> Surely the checking and different paths for static/dynamic configurations > can be an intrinsic detail of the pinctrl subsystem, by adding flags and > members to private structs like struct pinctrl itself in worst case.
I'll take a look if we can bury more things inside the pinctrl subsystem.
> So I'm not buying into this, it looks like it is making things complicated > for consumers outside the subsystem for no reason.
I don't think the consumer drivers eventually need to do much anything ideally. We're missing runtime PM related set_irq_wake() but that's a minor detail as we can initially keep the runtime PM related wake-up events always enabled.
Regards,
Tony
| |