Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761139Ab2FDXCm (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2012 19:02:42 -0400 Received: from va3ehsobe002.messaging.microsoft.com ([216.32.180.12]:42374 "EHLO va3outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761079Ab2FDXCl (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2012 19:02:41 -0400 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:70.37.183.190;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:mail.freescale.net;RD:none;EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -11 X-BigFish: VS-11(zzbb2dI9371I1432N98dKzz1202hzz8275bhz2dh2a8h668h839hd25he5bhf0ah) Message-ID: <4FCD3E8B.30805@freescale.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 18:02:35 -0500 From: Scott Wood User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Zhao Chenhui CC: , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] fsl_pmc: Add API to enable device as wakeup event source References: <1336737235-15370-1-git-send-email-chenhui.zhao@freescale.com> <1336737235-15370-4-git-send-email-chenhui.zhao@freescale.com> <4FC93D74.3090200@freescale.com> <20120604113609.GC20676@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20120604113609.GC20676@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginatorOrg: freescale.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3368 Lines: 93 On 06/04/2012 06:36 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: > On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 05:08:52PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: >> On 05/11/2012 06:53 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: >>> Add APIs for setting wakeup source and lossless Ethernet in low power modes. >>> These APIs can be used by wake-on-packet feature. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Dave Liu >>> Signed-off-by: Li Yang >>> Signed-off-by: Jin Qing >>> Signed-off-by: Zhao Chenhui >>> --- >>> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pmc.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.h | 9 +++++ >>> 2 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pmc.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pmc.c >>> index 1dc6e9e..c1170f7 100644 >>> --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pmc.c >>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pmc.c >>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ struct pmc_regs { >>> __be32 powmgtcsr; >>> #define POWMGTCSR_SLP 0x00020000 >>> #define POWMGTCSR_DPSLP 0x00100000 >>> +#define POWMGTCSR_LOSSLESS 0x00400000 >>> __be32 res3[2]; >>> __be32 pmcdr; >>> }; >>> @@ -43,6 +44,74 @@ static unsigned int pmc_flag; >>> >>> #define PMC_SLEEP 0x1 >>> #define PMC_DEEP_SLEEP 0x2 >>> +#define PMC_LOSSLESS 0x4 >>> + >>> +/** >>> + * mpc85xx_pmc_set_wake - enable devices as wakeup event source >>> + * @pdev: platform device affected >>> + * @enable: True to enable event generation; false to disable >>> + * >>> + * This enables the device as a wakeup event source, or disables it. >>> + * >>> + * RETURN VALUE: >>> + * 0 is returned on success >>> + * -EINVAL is returned if device is not supposed to wake up the system >>> + * Error code depending on the platform is returned if both the platform and >>> + * the native mechanism fail to enable the generation of wake-up events >>> + */ >>> +int mpc85xx_pmc_set_wake(struct platform_device *pdev, bool enable) >> >> Why does it have to be a platform_device? Would a bare device_node work >> here? If it's for stuff like device_may_wakeup() that could be in a >> platform_device wrapper function. > > It does not have to be a platform_device. I think it can be a struct device. Why does it even need that? The low level mechanism for influencing PMCDR should only need a device node, not a Linux device struct. >> Where does this get called from? I don't see an example user in this >> patchset. > > It will be used by a gianfar related patch. I plan to submit that patch > after these patches accepted. It would be nice to see how this is used when reviewing this. >>> +{ >>> + int ret = 0; >>> + struct device_node *clk_np; >>> + u32 *prop; >>> + u32 pmcdr_mask; >>> + >>> + if (!pmc_regs) { >>> + pr_err("%s: PMC is unavailable\n", __func__); >>> + return -ENODEV; >>> + } >>> + >>> + if (enable && !device_may_wakeup(&pdev->dev)) >>> + return -EINVAL; >> >> Who is setting can_wakeup for these devices? > > The device driver is responsible to set can_wakeup. How would the device driver know how to set it? Wouldn't this depend on the particular SoC and low power mode? -Scott -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/