Hi Andreas,
On 11/12/2021 08:54, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 00:20:24 +0100
> Merlijn Wajer <merlijn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hi Tony, Adam,
>>
>> I noticed that after I fixed the OFF mode regression between v5.9 and
>> v5.10 that there are another one between v5.10 and v5.11. Fortunately,
>> much like the other change it can be worked around with a config change,
>> and in fact it looks like the commit identified by git bisect is indeed
>> just a commit to change omap2plus_defconfig.
>>
>> a82820fcd079e38309403f595f005a8cc318a13c ("ARM: omap2plus_defconfig:
>> Enable OMAP3_THERMAL") prevents the N900 from entering OFF mode pretty
>> much all the time (I've seen scenarios with OFF:2,RET:500), but with the
>> config change reverted, stuff like this is more common: OFF:13,RET:2
>>
>> We will probably to keep the thermal features enabled, but maybe we can
>> figure out why it causes the SoC to not enter sleep modes?
>
> well, it was enabled after people agreed that is fixed... including me.
> It was wrongly enabled some time before, then disabled again, fixed and
> reenabled.
> The mentioned commit was just after the fix. So what is different now?
I'll have to find the mails you are referring to, but I suspect that if
the device wasn't hitting OFF mode on v5.10 because of the
CONFIG_COMPACT=y option in omap2plus_defconfig, it might have masked
this issue?
Regards,
Merlijn
