Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] thermal: ti-soc-thermal: Enable addition power
 management
To:     Adam Ford <aford173@gmail.com>, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     aford@beaconembedded.com, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
        Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>,
        Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
        Amit Kucheria <amitk@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20200911123157.759379-1-aford173@gmail.com>
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <6acd7e51-0c77-fa30-9e8c-d2cf727e512c@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 9 Oct 2020 01:23:21 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200911123157.759379-1-aford173@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 11/09/2020 14:31, Adam Ford wrote:
> The bandgap sensor can be idled when the processor is too, but it
> isn't currently being done, so the power consumption of OMAP3
> boards can elevated if the bangap sensor is enabled.
> 
> This patch attempts to use some additional power management
> to idle the clock to the bandgap when not needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173@gmail.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> # GTA04
> ---

[ ... ]

> -	/* First thing is to remove sensor interfaces */
> +	cpu_pm_unregister_notifier(&bgp->nb);
> +
> +	/* Remove sensor interfaces */
>  	for (i = 0; i < bgp->conf->sensor_count; i++) {
>  		if (bgp->conf->sensors[i].unregister_cooling)
>  			bgp->conf->sensors[i].unregister_cooling(bgp, i);
> @@ -1150,9 +1167,43 @@ static int ti_bandgap_suspend(struct device *dev)
>  	if (TI_BANDGAP_HAS(bgp, CLK_CTRL))
>  		clk_disable_unprepare(bgp->fclock);
>  
> +	bgp->is_suspended = true;

Is this flag really needed?


-- 
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog