Re: PROBLEM: bindings for drivers/mfd/twl4030-power.c
* Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140901 09:54]: Hi, Am 25.08.2014 um 23:26 schrieb Tony Lindgren: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140817 08:46]: I am trying to make ti,use_poweroff work on 3.17-rc1 for the GTA04 board. Poweroff was broken for a while and I found that the driver isn't loaded at all. It appears to me that commit e7cd1d1eb16fcdf53001b926187a82f1f3e1a7e6 did rename the compatible entry from ti,twl4030-power to ti,twl4030-power-reset but this was not documented in the bindings and of course our DT does not match. Even your commit message talks about ti,twl4030-power although I can't find it in the code. Hmm sorry did I accidentally remove ti,twl4030-power? If so, that should be added back for sure. Do you have a patch for that already? No, I have only updated our device tree because I don't know if it really should be added back or not. As you say the ti,twl4030-power does not configure anything. So what is it good for? Only for the poweroff if ti,use_poweroff is set. Care to do a patch as you clearly have a use case to test it with? Are ti,twl4030-power and ti,twl4030-power-reset doing the same? No, they are separate where ti,twl4030-power does not configure the twl4030 in any way where ti,twl4030-power-reset configures the warm reset sequence. Yes, that is what I deduced because our old setting of ti,twl4030-power did no longer configure the power-off and not even load the driver. For gta04, what you really want is to use ti,twl4030-power-idle or even ti,twl4030-power-idle-osc-off if the board is wired to support cutting off the oscillator. Ok, I see (but must admit that I don't understand the details even after reading the bindings.txt). Well the twl4030 has resources such as GPIO pins and regulators that can be configured to automatically change state for retention and off-idle. That's how we can cut off the core voltage for idle. Currently we develop without taking care of suspend (the DT migration was much more troublesome work than anticipated) but that should be changed soon. OK, yeah the PM features should be finally working now with mainline and DT :) And you probably also want to configure some wake-up interrupts at least for the the UARTs in the board specific .dts file, see for example the UART3 in the existing board files that have: interrupts-extended = intc 74 omap3_pmx_core OMAP3_UART3_RX; thanks for the hint! No problem. And FYI, the reason why we can't add that automatically is because there are alternate pins for UART3 pins depending on the packaging and which pin is actually wired up. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: PROBLEM: bindings for drivers/mfd/twl4030-power.c
On 09/03/2014 01:45 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140901 09:54]: Hi, Am 25.08.2014 um 23:26 schrieb Tony Lindgren: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140817 08:46]: I am trying to make ti,use_poweroff work on 3.17-rc1 for the GTA04 board. Poweroff was broken for a while and I found that the driver isn't loaded at all. It appears to me that commit e7cd1d1eb16fcdf53001b926187a82f1f3e1a7e6 did rename the compatible entry from ti,twl4030-power to ti,twl4030-power-reset but this was not documented in the bindings and of course our DT does not match. Even your commit message talks about ti,twl4030-power although I can't find it in the code. Hmm sorry did I accidentally remove ti,twl4030-power? If so, that should be added back for sure. Do you have a patch for that already? No, I have only updated our device tree because I don't know if it really should be added back or not. As you say the ti,twl4030-power does not configure anything. So what is it good for? Only for the poweroff if ti,use_poweroff is set. Care to do a patch as you clearly have a use case to test it with? Tony, we were talking about supporting ti,system-power-controller as the standard way of stating poweroff control is by the PMIC. this seems to be standard in various SoCs. use_poweroff seems to predate that standardization. Should'nt we start using ti,system-power-controller instead? -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: PROBLEM: bindings for drivers/mfd/twl4030-power.c
* Nishanth Menon n...@ti.com [140903 11:51]: On 09/03/2014 01:45 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140901 09:54]: Hi, Am 25.08.2014 um 23:26 schrieb Tony Lindgren: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140817 08:46]: I am trying to make ti,use_poweroff work on 3.17-rc1 for the GTA04 board. Poweroff was broken for a while and I found that the driver isn't loaded at all. It appears to me that commit e7cd1d1eb16fcdf53001b926187a82f1f3e1a7e6 did rename the compatible entry from ti,twl4030-power to ti,twl4030-power-reset but this was not documented in the bindings and of course our DT does not match. Even your commit message talks about ti,twl4030-power although I can't find it in the code. Hmm sorry did I accidentally remove ti,twl4030-power? If so, that should be added back for sure. Do you have a patch for that already? No, I have only updated our device tree because I don't know if it really should be added back or not. As you say the ti,twl4030-power does not configure anything. So what is it good for? Only for the poweroff if ti,use_poweroff is set. Care to do a patch as you clearly have a use case to test it with? Tony, we were talking about supporting ti,system-power-controller as the standard way of stating poweroff control is by the PMIC. this seems to be standard in various SoCs. use_poweroff seems to predate that standardization. Should'nt we start using ti,system-power-controller instead? Sure we can add that. But need to keep also parsing ti,use_poweroff as it's already in use. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: PROBLEM: bindings for drivers/mfd/twl4030-power.c
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com wrote: * Nishanth Menon n...@ti.com [140903 11:51]: On 09/03/2014 01:45 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140901 09:54]: Hi, Am 25.08.2014 um 23:26 schrieb Tony Lindgren: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140817 08:46]: I am trying to make ti,use_poweroff work on 3.17-rc1 for the GTA04 board. Poweroff was broken for a while and I found that the driver isn't loaded at all. It appears to me that commit e7cd1d1eb16fcdf53001b926187a82f1f3e1a7e6 did rename the compatible entry from ti,twl4030-power to ti,twl4030-power-reset but this was not documented in the bindings and of course our DT does not match. Even your commit message talks about ti,twl4030-power although I can't find it in the code. Hmm sorry did I accidentally remove ti,twl4030-power? If so, that should be added back for sure. Do you have a patch for that already? No, I have only updated our device tree because I don't know if it really should be added back or not. As you say the ti,twl4030-power does not configure anything. So what is it good for? Only for the poweroff if ti,use_poweroff is set. Care to do a patch as you clearly have a use case to test it with? Tony, we were talking about supporting ti,system-power-controller as the standard way of stating poweroff control is by the PMIC. this seems to be standard in various SoCs. use_poweroff seems to predate that standardization. Should'nt we start using ti,system-power-controller instead? Sure we can add that. But need to keep also parsing ti,use_poweroff as it's already in use. Yep. https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4836381/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4836371/ Split documentation out (based on discussion in https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4743321/). -- --- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: PROBLEM: bindings for drivers/mfd/twl4030-power.c
Hi, Am 25.08.2014 um 23:26 schrieb Tony Lindgren: * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140817 08:46]: I am trying to make ti,use_poweroff work on 3.17-rc1 for the GTA04 board. Poweroff was broken for a while and I found that the driver isn't loaded at all. It appears to me that commit e7cd1d1eb16fcdf53001b926187a82f1f3e1a7e6 did rename the compatible entry from ti,twl4030-power to ti,twl4030-power-reset but this was not documented in the bindings and of course our DT does not match. Even your commit message talks about ti,twl4030-power although I can't find it in the code. Hmm sorry did I accidentally remove ti,twl4030-power? If so, that should be added back for sure. Do you have a patch for that already? No, I have only updated our device tree because I don't know if it really should be added back or not. As you say the ti,twl4030-power does not configure anything. So what is it good for? Are ti,twl4030-power and ti,twl4030-power-reset doing the same? No, they are separate where ti,twl4030-power does not configure the twl4030 in any way where ti,twl4030-power-reset configures the warm reset sequence. Yes, that is what I deduced because our old setting of ti,twl4030-power did no longer configure the power-off and not even load the driver. For gta04, what you really want is to use ti,twl4030-power-idle or even ti,twl4030-power-idle-osc-off if the board is wired to support cutting off the oscillator. Ok, I see (but must admit that I don't understand the details even after reading the bindings.txt). Currently we develop without taking care of suspend (the DT migration was much more troublesome work than anticipated) but that should be changed soon. And you probably also want to configure some wake-up interrupts at least for the the UARTs in the board specific .dts file, see for example the UART3 in the existing board files that have: interrupts-extended = intc 74 omap3_pmx_core OMAP3_UART3_RX; thanks for the hint! BR, Nikolaus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: PROBLEM: bindings for drivers/mfd/twl4030-power.c
* Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller h...@goldelico.com [140817 08:46]: I am trying to make ti,use_poweroff work on 3.17-rc1 for the GTA04 board. Poweroff was broken for a while and I found that the driver isn't loaded at all. It appears to me that commit e7cd1d1eb16fcdf53001b926187a82f1f3e1a7e6 did rename the compatible entry from ti,twl4030-power to ti,twl4030-power-reset but this was not documented in the bindings and of course our DT does not match. Even your commit message talks about ti,twl4030-power although I can't find it in the code. Hmm sorry did I accidentally remove ti,twl4030-power? If so, that should be added back for sure. Do you have a patch for that already? Are ti,twl4030-power and ti,twl4030-power-reset doing the same? No, they are separate where ti,twl4030-power does not configure the twl4030 in any way where ti,twl4030-power-reset configures the warm reset sequence. For gta04, what you really want is to use ti,twl4030-power-idle or even ti,twl4030-power-idle-osc-off if the board is wired to support cutting off the oscillator. And you probably also want to configure some wake-up interrupts at least for the the UARTs in the board specific .dts file, see for example the UART3 in the existing board files that have: interrupts-extended = intc 74 omap3_pmx_core OMAP3_UART3_RX; Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
