[PATCH] ARM: davinci: enable PM for DT boot

[Kevin Hilman]

Sekhar Nori <nsekhar at ti.com> writes:

> On Tuesday 08 November 2016 11:43 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Hi Sekhar,
>> 
>> Sekhar Nori <nsekhar at ti.com> writes:
>> 
>>> On Wednesday 26 October 2016 03:17 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>>> Currently system PM is only enabled for legacy (non-DT) boot.  Enable
>>>> for DT boot also.
>>>>
>>>> Tested on da850-lcdk using "rtcwake -m mem -s5 -d rtc0".
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman at baylibre.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  arch/arm/mach-davinci/da8xx-dt.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da8xx-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da8xx-dt.c
>>>> index c9f7e9274aa8..a8089fa40d86 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da8xx-dt.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da8xx-dt.c
>>>> @@ -43,8 +43,26 @@ static struct of_dev_auxdata da850_auxdata_lookup[] __initdata = {
>>>>  
>>>>  #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_DAVINCI_DA850
>>>>  
>>>> +static struct davinci_pm_config da850_pm_pdata = {
>>>> +	.sleepcount = 128,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +static struct platform_device da850_pm_device = {
>>>> +	.name           = "pm-davinci",
>>>> +	.dev = {
>>>> +		.platform_data	= &da850_pm_pdata,
>>>> +	},
>>>> +	.id             = -1,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>>  static void __init da850_init_machine(void)
>>>>  {
>>>> +	int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +	ret = da850_register_pm(&da850_pm_device);
>>>
>>> I am not sure if it makes sense to keep the "pm device" around anymore.
>>> I think for both DT and non-DT boot, we can get rid of the fake PM
>>> device and combine da850_register_pm() and davinci_pm_probe() into a
>>> single davinci_init_suspend() function which can then be called both for
>>> DT and non-DT boot.
>> 
>> Looking closer at this, where do you propose the pdata comes from for
>> the non-DT boot?
>> 
>> It seems to me that we can't currently remove the pdata dependency
>> without breaking the non-DT platforms, so the approach proposed here is
>> the least invasive.
>
> There is a single value of sleep count that is used today (128). So I
> was thinking we can hardcode that in pm.c. We are not going to add more
> board files anyway so there is no risk here.
>
> For future, if a different sleepcount value is needed, it will need to
> be a new DT property.

Right, but getting rid of the pdata is more than just hard-coding the
sleep count. There are a bunch of other fields in the pdata, which are
filled out to some standard defaults in da850.c.  Are you proposing to
hard-code those in pm.c also?

An intermediate step might be to start by removing the
platform_device/pdata from the board files, but keep it in da850.c for
now.  Then, a follow-up cleanup could be done to either move all of that
into pm.c, or use DT.

Kevin