On 11/12/2021 11:23, Merlijn Wajer wrote:
> 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?
Correction: CONFIG_COMPAT=y is not in omap2plus_defconfig, but it does
get enabled by default since v5.10, so the above still holds.
Regards,
Merlijn
