On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:51:22PM +0200, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 27. August 2015, 12:30:51 schrieb Doug Anderson:
> > If I understand correctly, the distinction between "standby" and "mem"
> > is not too clearly defined, so if we wanted to use it for this it
> > wouldn't be terrible?
I never understood many clear definitions here either, personally.
> From reading Documentation/power/states.txt it looks like the boot-cpu is
> supposed to retain power in the suspend state. Although we also do not lose
> "operating state" in our suspend I guess?
>
> So using the shallow suspend as standby sounds interesting, for the time when
> the deep suspend works too. If there is only one suspend state it
> automatically becomes the "mem"-state it seems.
It's not really "automatic", it's a product of this line:
static const struct platform_suspend_ops rk3288_suspend_ops = {
.enter = rk3288_suspend_enter,
.valid = suspend_valid_only_mem, <--- here
.prepare = rk3288_suspend_prepare,
.finish = rk3288_suspend_finish,
};
and the fact that we don't check the 'state' argument in
.enter/.prepare/.finish.
But still, I'm not sure it's productive to rename shallow until we support
deep.
Regards,
Brian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
