[PATCH RFC 1/2] Documentation: arm: define DT bindings for system suspend

[Lorenzo Pieralisi]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 01:35:07PM +0000, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> Dear Sudeep,
> 
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 05:21:39 -0800
> Jisheng Zhang <jszhang at marvell.com> wrote:
> 
> > Dear Sudeep,
> > 
> > On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 03:35:54 -0800
> > Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > ARM based platforms implement unique ways to enter system suspend
> > > (i.e. Suspend to RAM). The mechanism and the parameters defining the
> > > system state vary on a per-platform basis forcing the OS to handle it
> > > in very platform specific way.
> > > 
> > > Since ARM 32-bit systems had machine specific code, no attempts to
> > > standardize are being made as it provides easy way to implement suspend
> > > operations in a platform specific manner. However, this approach not
> > > only makes maintainance more difficult as the number of platforms
> > > supported increases but also not feasible for ARM64.
> > > 
> > > This DT binding aims at standardizing the system suspend for ARM
> > > platforms. ARM64 platforms mandates entry-method property in DT for
> > > this system suspend node.
> > > 
> > > On system implementing PSCI as an enable-method to enter system suspend,
> > > the PSCI CPU suspend method is used on versions upto v0.2 and requires
> > > the power_state parameter to be passed to the PSCI CPU suspend function.
> > > 
> > > This parameter is platform specific, therefore must be provided by
> > > firmware to the OS in order to enable proper call sequence.
> > > 
> > > This ARM system suspend DT bindings rely on a property
> > > (i.e. arm,psci-suspend-param) in the PSCI DT bindings that describes
> > > how the PSCI CPU suspend power_state parameter should be defined in DT.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/psci.txt     | 11 +++
> > >  .../devicetree/bindings/arm/system-suspend.txt     | 93
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 104 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/system-suspend.txt
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/psci.txt
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/psci.txt index
> > > 5aa40ede0e99..bd3977a2a333 100644 ---
> > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/psci.txt +++
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/psci.txt @@ -61,6 +61,14 @@ Device
> > > tree nodes that require usage of PSCI CPU_SUSPEND function (ie idle
> > > Definition: power_state parameter to pass to the PSCI suspend call.
> > >  
> > > +PSCI v0.2 and earlier versions don't have explicit operation for system
> > > +suspend. However, one can implement system suspend using CPU_SUSPEND by
> > > +ensuring every other core except the one executing the CPU_SUSPEND call
> > > +has called into PSCI through a CPU_OFF call.
> > 
> > If users explicitly hot-unplug other cores when system load is low to save
> > power, then we want to suspend at some point, how does the firmware know
> > this case?
> 
> Sorry for confusion. I mean 
> 
> If users explicitly hot-unplug other cores when system load is low to save
> power, then at some point cpuidle want to suspend the cluster, how does the
> distinguish this case with suspend the system to ram.

Through the arm,psci-suspend-param DT property, ie PSCI CPU_SUSPEND
power_state parameter.

Did you read the patch :) ?

> > In my private tree, I extend the PSCI spec to tell firmware we want to
> > suspend the system.
> 
> I extend the PSCI suspend function to help firmware distinguish suspend system
> to ram and other suspend cores/clusters.

See above.

Thanks,
Lorenzo