Javier, On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas <[email protected]> wrote: >> It turns out that regulator_suspend_finish() actually returns an error >> code. Could you print a warning if you see it? >> > > Yes, I noticed this when looking at Chris patch for Rockchip but didn't > re-spin > because I'm not sure anymore if this is the right solution. I mean, if is > correct to add the same calls on every platform or if the regulator suspend > prepare and finish functions should be called from the suspend core instead. > > For example calling regulator_suspend_prepare() from > platform_suspend_prepare() > [0] will have the advantage of passing the correct suspend_state_t state > instead > of hard-coding PM_SUSPEND_MEM and will make the regulator suspend states to > work > on all platforms.
Yes. If we can get this added to the core that would be better. I guess I was just trying to follow the suggestion that was in the regulator code: http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/regulator/core.c#L3699 that says "This will usually be called by machine suspend code prior to supending." -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
