On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 14:33:13 -0500 Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 2:14 PM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > On 10/09/2020 20:01, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > > On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 07:59:23 -0500 > > > Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > >> The bandgap sensor can be idled when the processor is too, but it > > >> isn't currently being done, so the power consumption of OMAP3 > > >> boards can elevated if the bangap sensor is enabled. > > >> > > >> This patch attempts to use some additional power management > > >> to idle the clock to the bandgap when not needed. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx> > > >> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > > >> --- > > >> V2: Fix issue where variable stating the suspend mode isn't being > > >> properly set and cleared. > > >> > > > hmm, it is not in linux-next. Can we expect that for v5.10? > > > > The reason I did not pick this patch is because lkp reported an error on > > it. > > > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-pm&m=159788472017308&w=2 > > > > > > > That error message shows it's trying to be built with 'sh' cross compiler, > but should be build with an ARM. > > I can run a manual test of the patch against a different branch if > necessary, but I had built and tested it, so I know it worked at one time. > hmm, what about compile-testing without CONFIG_PM_SLEEP? The function definition is guarded by that. So it is not a sh-specific problem. Regards, Andreas
