On 2019-10-26 00:40, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
+/* DSP D0ix sub-state */
+enum sof_d0_substate {
+ SOF_DSP_D0I0 = 0, /* DSP default D0 substate */
+ SOF_DSP_D0I3, /* DSP D0i3(low power) substate*/
+};
Name of the type states: "d0 substate" while description "D0ix
sub-state". Why was not this named D0ix from the get-go? Goes into the
same the same naming bucket as S0ix.
On the further note, adding D0ix patch within "enable S0ix support for
Intel platforms" is misleading. S-states != D-states. D0ix is especially
orthogonal. It is these to further reduce power consumption when system
and device are in S0 and D0 respectively and idle time between IPC
communication is long enough for DSP to be power gated.
Czarek
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
