[PATCH v3 8/8] PM / doc: Update device documentation for devices in IRQ safe PM domains

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Lina Iyer <lina.iyer at linaro.org> wrote:
> Update documentation to reflect the changes made to support IRQ safe PM
> domains.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer <lina.iyer at linaro.org>
> Acked-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson at linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/power/devices.txt | 9 ++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/power/devices.txt b/Documentation/power/devices.txt
> index 8ba6625..0401b53 100644
> --- a/Documentation/power/devices.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/power/devices.txt
> @@ -607,7 +607,14 @@ individually.  Instead, a set of devices sharing a power resource can be put
>  into a low-power state together at the same time by turning off the shared
>  power resource.  Of course, they also need to be put into the full-power state
>  together, by turning the shared power resource on.  A set of devices with this
> -property is often referred to as a power domain.
> +property is often referred to as a power domain. A power domain may also be
> +nested inside another power domain.
> +
> +Devices and PM domains may be defined as IRQ-safe, if they can be powered
> +on/off even when the IRQs are disabled. An IRQ-safe device in a domain will
> +disallow power management on the domain, unless the domain is also defined as
> +IRQ-safe. The restriction this framework imposes on the parent domain of an
> +IRQ-safe domain is that it must also be defined as IRQ-safe.

I would put this paragraph below, before the last paragraph in the section.

Also I suppose that a domain should only be defined as "IRQ-safe" if
all of the devices in it are "IRQ-safe" (or there will be problems at
least in principle).  If that is the case, it should be stated clearly
in the paragraph you are adding as well.

Thanks,
Rafael