Hi Stephen, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Fri, 20 Sep 2019 09:54:01 -0700: > Quoting Miquel Raynal (2019-09-20 01:03:01) > > Hi Stephen, > > > > Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Tue, 17 Sep 2019 10:31:53 > > -0700: > > > > > Quoting Miquel Raynal (2019-06-27 05:52:41) > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > As part of an effort to bring suspend to RAM support to the Armada > > > > 3700 SoC (main target: ESPRESSObin board), there are small things to > > > > do in the Armada 3700 peripherals clock driver: > > > > > > > > * On this SoC, the PCIe controller gets fed by a gated clock in the > > > > south bridge. This clock is missing in the current driver, patch 1 > > > > adds it. > > > > > > > > * Because of a constraint in the PCI core, the resume function of a > > > > PCIe controller driver must be run at an early stage > > > > (->suspend/resume_noirq()), before the core tries to ->read/write() > > > > in the PCIe registers to do more configuration. Hence, the PCIe > > > > clock must be resumed before. This is enforced thanks to two > > > > changes: > > > > 1/ Add device links to the clock framework. This enforce order in > > > > the PM core: the clocks are resumed before the consumers. Series > > > > has been posted, see [1]. > > > > 2/ Even with the above feature, the clock's resume() callback is > > > > called after the PCI controller's resume_noirq() callback. The > > > > only way to fix this is to change the "priority" of the clock > > > > suspend/resume callbacks. This is done in patch 2. > > > > > > > > * The bindings are updated with the PCI clock in patch 4 while patch 3 > > > > is just a typo correction in the same file. > > > > > > > > If there is anything unclear please feel free to ask. > > > > > > > > > > Should I drop this patch series? > > > > > > > No, if it is right for you I would really prefer to have it merged > > (sorry for the delay in answering though) because it will be still > > needed, no matter how clock dependencies are handled. > > > > > > Ok. I'll apply it after the merge window. Let me know if it's more > urgent than that. > No it's not, 5.5 is fine. Thanks, Miquèl
