From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shubhrajyoti Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] i2c: omap: Do not enable the irq always Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 20:29:14 +0530 Message-ID: <50783042.2040609@ti.com> References: <1349687116-14463-1-git-send-email-shubhrajyoti@ti.com> <87lifb7odc.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87lifb7odc.fsf-1D3HCaltpLuhEniVeURVKkEOCMrvLtNR@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Kevin Hilman Cc: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org, kalle.jokiniemi-4y2FMlU5MS8onNqTyK5kxQ@public.gmane.org, grygorii.strashko-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org, huzefank-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Friday 12 October 2012 08:01 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: > When using runtime PM with auto-suspend timeouts, why would you disable > the IRQ before the runtime suspend handlers have run? > > If you really want to do this, you probably should have these in the > runtime PM callbacks. But I'll wait until you add a more descriptive > changelog before I can really tell why this is being done. Based on the > discussion in the patch from Kalle, I'm assuming this is to prevent > interrups when I2C is being used by co-processors. If so, plese > describe in the changelog. > > That being said, doesn't the runtime suspend callback already disable > IRQs at the device level instead of the INTC level? I thought of not relying on the intc as the registers may be reconfigured. > Kevin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: shubhrajyoti@ti.com (Shubhrajyoti) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 20:29:14 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] i2c: omap: Do not enable the irq always In-Reply-To: <87lifb7odc.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <1349687116-14463-1-git-send-email-shubhrajyoti@ti.com> <87lifb7odc.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Message-ID: <50783042.2040609@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Friday 12 October 2012 08:01 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: > When using runtime PM with auto-suspend timeouts, why would you disable > the IRQ before the runtime suspend handlers have run? > > If you really want to do this, you probably should have these in the > runtime PM callbacks. But I'll wait until you add a more descriptive > changelog before I can really tell why this is being done. Based on the > discussion in the patch from Kalle, I'm assuming this is to prevent > interrups when I2C is being used by co-processors. If so, plese > describe in the changelog. > > That being said, doesn't the runtime suspend callback already disable > IRQs at the device level instead of the INTC level? I thought of not relying on the intc as the registers may be reconfigured. > Kevin