Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-10-18 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 10/18/2016 06:36 PM, Brian Norris wrote: > I believe we do not on either rk3288 or rk3399. We'd have to be powering > off almost the entire system before we'd be able to gate the 24 MHz > oscillator, AIUI. > Great! That avoids a major headache. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-10-18 Thread Brian Norris
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 06:24:41PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Just curious, do we enter this state during cpuidle as well? Or > is it only across suspend that the clock stops working? I believe we do not on either rk3288 or rk3399. We'd have to be powering off almost the entire system before we'

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-10-18 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 10/04, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Marc, > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 05:08:47PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 18:23:11 -0700 > > Brian Norris wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:47:07AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > > > rk3288 (ARMv7 system widely used for our Chrom

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-10-04 Thread Brian Norris
Hi Marc, On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 05:08:47PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 18:23:11 -0700 > Brian Norris wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:47:07AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > rk3288 (ARMv7 system widely used for our Chromebooks) has the same > > issue, except the ker

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-09-29 Thread Marc Zyngier
On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 18:23:11 -0700 Brian Norris wrote: Hi Brian, > Hi Marc, > > Thanks again for the help. I was checking with Rockchip on the details. > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:47:07AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > The counter is allowed to be clocked at a different rate, as long as it

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-09-27 Thread Brian Norris
Hi Marc, Thanks again for the help. I was checking with Rockchip on the details. On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:47:07AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > The counter is allowed to be clocked at a different rate, as long as it > is incremented by the frequency ratio on each tick of the new frequency. > In

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-09-20 Thread Marc Zyngier
On 20/09/16 00:14, Brian Norris wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 09:06:55AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> Hi Brian, > > Hi Marc, > > Thanks for the quick response. > >> On 16/09/16 06:49, Brian Norris wrote: >>> Since commit 4fbcdc813fb9 ("clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Use clocksource >>> for sus

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-09-19 Thread Brian Norris
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 09:06:55AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Hi Brian, Hi Marc, Thanks for the quick response. > On 16/09/16 06:49, Brian Norris wrote: > > Since commit 4fbcdc813fb9 ("clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Use clocksource > > for suspend timekeeping"), this driver assumes that the ARM

Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Don't assume clock runs in suspend

2016-09-16 Thread Marc Zyngier
Hi Brian, On 16/09/16 06:49, Brian Norris wrote: > Since commit 4fbcdc813fb9 ("clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Use clocksource > for suspend timekeeping"), this driver assumes that the ARM architected > timer keeps running in suspend. This is not the case for some ARM SoCs, > depending on the HW stat