Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-20 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 01:12:08PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > I might just be looking at the wrong place and if so I'm sorry, but I > don't see any (additional) fixes related to this here: Seems to have got stuck somewhere, sorry - pushed now. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-20 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 01:12:08PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > I might just be looking at the wrong place and if so I'm sorry, but I > don't see any (additional) fixes related to this here: Seems to have got stuck somewhere, sorry - pushed now. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-20 Thread Hans de Goede
Hi, On 20-02-18 12:47, Mark Brown wrote: On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 09:59:13PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: On 19-02-18 12:34, Mark Brown wrote: There are multiple callers of regulator_get_suspend_state() in drivers/regulator/core.c, I assume you refer to this commit:

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-20 Thread Hans de Goede
Hi, On 20-02-18 12:47, Mark Brown wrote: On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 09:59:13PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: On 19-02-18 12:34, Mark Brown wrote: There are multiple callers of regulator_get_suspend_state() in drivers/regulator/core.c, I assume you refer to this commit:

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-20 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 09:59:13PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 19-02-18 12:34, Mark Brown wrote: > There are multiple callers of regulator_get_suspend_state() in > drivers/regulator/core.c, I assume you refer to this commit: >

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-20 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 09:59:13PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 19-02-18 12:34, Mark Brown wrote: > There are multiple callers of regulator_get_suspend_state() in > drivers/regulator/core.c, I assume you refer to this commit: >

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-19 Thread Hans de Goede
Hi, On 19-02-18 12:34, Mark Brown wrote: On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:04:24PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: The regulator framework is used on x86 in some cases now and x86 has a PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t, treat this as PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY, this fixes these errors on resume: This was

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-19 Thread Hans de Goede
Hi, On 19-02-18 12:34, Mark Brown wrote: On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:04:24PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: The regulator framework is used on x86 in some cases now and x86 has a PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t, treat this as PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY, this fixes these errors on resume: This was

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-19 Thread Mark Brown
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:04:24PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > The regulator framework is used on x86 in some cases now and x86 has > a PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t, treat this as PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY, > this fixes these errors on resume: This was already fixed by Geert. signature.asc

Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Handle PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t

2018-02-19 Thread Mark Brown
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:04:24PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > The regulator framework is used on x86 in some cases now and x86 has > a PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE suspend_state_t, treat this as PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY, > this fixes these errors on resume: This was already fixed by Geert. signature.asc