On 10/3/24 15:18, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 10/3/24 2:58 PM, Alexis Lothoré wrote: >> On 10/3/24 12:49, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> On 10/3/24 10:31 AM, Alexis Lothoré wrote: >>>> On 9/29/24 17:23, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>>> On 9/28/24 1:18 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>>>>> Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The WILC3000 can suspend and enter low power state. According to local >>>>>>> measurements, the WILC3000 consumes the same amount of power if the slot >>>>>>> is powered up and WILC3000 is suspended, and if the WILC3000 is powered >>>>>>> off. Use the former option, keep the WILC3000 powered up as that allows >>>>>>> for things like WoWlan to work. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note that this is tested on WILC3000 only, not on WILC1000 . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> Cc: Ajay Singh <ajay.kathat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> Cc: Alexis Lothoré <alexis.lothore@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> Cc: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> Cc: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> >>>>>>> Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> V2: Rebase on next-20240926 >>>>>> >>>>>> BTW I recommend using wireless-next as the baseline for wireless >>>>>> patches. For example, wireless-next is not pulled to linux-next during >>>>>> merge windows or other patches in linux-next might create unnecessary >>>>>> conflicts. Of course most of the cases using linux-next is fine. >>>>> I didn't know there was one such tree, added to remotes, thanks ! >>>> >>>> +1, as already mentioned in previous revisions, I would gladly test wilc3000 >>>> changes on both wilc3000 and wilc1000 on my platform, and having the series on >>>> top of wireless-next would allow to do it on top of any change also affecting >>>> the driver in wireless-next :) >>> >>> I just had a look at a diff between wireless-next/main and next/master 20241003 >>> for drivers/net/wireless/microchip , there are no changes to the driver between >>> the two trees, so it should be possible to test this patch on either tree. Can >>> you give it a try ? Ideally test this patch separately on WILC1000 across >>> suspend/resume and check if it works. You might need the MMC controller fix >>> which sets struct mmc_host .pm_caps |= MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER for your controller , >>> unless this is already upstream. >>> >>> The WILC3000 series depends on this patch. >>> >> Meh, you are right, I have read too fast your answer to my initial question >> about used base branch, and omitted the suspend/resume patch (I assumed it >> conflicted because of some other patches in wireless-next). > Nope, it conflicted because I (again) didn't include cover letter with the > WILC3000 series, which mentions this information. I really need to find some > suitable tooling to manage the cover letters, branch description does not seem > to cut it quite as I hoped it would. May I suggest b4 [0] for such task ? It really eases series submissions, taking care of all the small details that can be easily forgotten :) Latest versions of the tool will warn you during the sending phase if you forgot to create/update your cover letter (which is stored by default as an empty commit, this can be tuned). It is even able now to manage patch sets dependencies (but I still did not have the opportunity to give this feature a try) [0] https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/ -- Alexis Lothoré, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
