[PATCH v4 1/2] ARM: keystone: pm: switch to use generic pm domains
khilman at kernel.org
Thu Nov 20 17:30:53 PST 2014
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert at linux-m68k.org> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:48 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman at kernel.org> wrote:
>>>> So what exactly are we talking about with "PM" clocks, and why are they
>>>> "special" when it comes to PM domains? IOW, why are the clocks to be
>>>> managed during PM domain transitions for a given device any different
>>>> than the clocks that need to be managed for a runtime suspend/resume (or
>>>> system suspend/resume) sequence for the same device?
>>> (Speaking for my case, shmobile)
>>> They're not. The clocks to be managed during PM domain transitions are the
>>> same as the clocks that need to be managed for a runtime suspend/resume
>>> (or system suspend/resume) sequence.
>>> The special thing is that this is more a platform than a driver thing: the same
>>> module may have a "PM/functional" clock (that is documented to enable/disable
>>> the module) on one Soc, but noet on another.
>> So why isn't the presence or absence of the clock described in the .dtsi
>> for the SoC instead of being handled by special PM domain logic?
> It is. Cfr. the presence/absence of clocks for renesas,rcar-gpio nodes.
Hmm, OK, Good.
So now I'm confused about why the PM domain has to do anything special
if the presence/absence of the clocks is already handled by the DT.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel