On 16/03/2023 16:41, Jan Jasper de Kroon wrote: >> Anyway, the property does not look suitable for Devicetree. You describe >> system policy - trade off between energy saving and responsivness to the >> user. DT is not for policies. Use other interfaces for configuring it, >> e.g. some user-space, existing PM interfaces or /sysfs (which is ABI and >> needs its Documentation). >> >> >>> + >>> additionalProperties: false >>> >>> required: >>> @@ -75,6 +84,7 @@ examples: >>> interrupts = <0 0>; >>> irq-gpios = <&gpio1 0 0>; >>> reset-gpios = <&gpio1 1 0>; >>> + hold-in-reset-in-suspend; >>> }; >>> }; >>> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >> > I think the latest patch covers most of the feedback you provided. > Regarding the addition of this feature to the DeviceTree. Currently this > is only used on the Linux powered PinePhone Original and PinePhone Pro. It > also isn't really a policy change, What is "policy change"? I said it is system policy. > but rather an attempt to minimize > battery consumption on these power hungry devices. We do not talk about the goal, but whether this is property of Devicetree or not. > Developers made a lot > of tweaks here and there, to make the PinePhone get through a day of light > use. This is one of these tweaks. Awesome, how is this related to my concerns that it is not suitable for Devicetree? Developers can invent thousands of things, shall we put them all to Devicetree? Bring specific arguments to my questions. Arguing that it is not a "policy change" is not related to my question. Just like calling something tweaks. Best regards, Krzysztof
