Re: [PATCH v5 00/11] PM / Domains: Generic OF-based support
From: Ulf Hansson <hidden>
Date: 2014-09-25 15:29:10
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-arm-kernel, linux-devicetree
On 25 September 2014 13:21, Thierry Reding [off-list ref] wrote:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the local patches I had to add a very similar framework. One of the reasons why I hadn't posted these publicly yet is because the platform where I want to use this (Tegra) is somewhat quirky when it comes to power domains.
It's great that more things goes on in this area. :-)
On Tegra these domains are called power gates and they currently have their own API. We've been looking at migrating things over to some generic framework for some time and PM domains do seem like a good fit. However one of the quirks regarding these domains on Tegra is that a fixed sequence exists that needs to be respected when enabling or disabling a power partition. The exact sequence can be found in the drivers/soc/tegra/pmc.c driver's tegra_powergate_sequence_power_up() function. Essentially we need to call into the clock and reset drivers at very specific moments during the operations that the PMC does.
I am not sure I fully understand how the power gating actually happens. How is it triggered?
One solution to this would be to make the needed clocks and resets available to the power domain driver via DT, but then we have the problem that two drivers would be controlling the same resources. For example drivers could still want to disable the clock for more fine- grained power management.
Sorry, but I think I need a better understanding to be able to comment. But maybe, drivers could implement runtime PM support and define runtime PM callbacks. From the callbacks those will handle clocks and resets, is not that enough? What more is needed from a PM domain point of view?
Furthermore for some devices it may turn out that turning the domain off and on introduces too much latency to be useful.
This should be handled by the generic PM domain governor. Through the per device QOS, you are able to set latencies constraints which could prevent a PM domain from being gated.
Does anyone have any better ideas on how to make that work with this generic PM domain framework? Or is Tegra just too special to be a good fit?
I certainly think it's worth a try, I would be surprised if we shouldn't be able to address requirements from Tegra. As you might have figured out, I am dedicated to improve the generic power domain such it could fit more SOCs than today, thus I am also hoping for more SOC to start to convert to it. Kind regards Uffe