From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>, Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@ti.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP/pinmux: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:31:59 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56DEB82F.5050703@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160215152751.GT19432@atomide.com>
On 02/15/2016 10:27 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [160215 02:03]:
>> Hi Linus,
>>
>> On 13/02/16 14:42, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class
>>>> pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag
>>>> ARM: OMAP2+: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag
>>>>
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/mux.c | 4 ++--
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c | 9 ++++-----
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c | 1 +
>>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
>>>
>>> Are these patches orthogonal so I can merge the pinctrl patch independently
>>> of the OMAP patches if Tony ACKs this?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the follow up.
>> IIUC they are dependent and remember Tony/Grygorii wanted them to be
>> merged together(at-least for bisectibility)
>
> AFAIK this series needs to be kept together to keep things
> working.
>
>>> If not: should it be merged by me or through ARM SoC/Tony?
>>>
>>
>> I think so.
>>
>>> Anyways waiting for maintainer feedback, but the above is good to know.
>>>
>>
>> Grygorii was still not sure if this works and he couldn't give it a
>> test. He was traveling and may need more time to get back on this.
>
> He said it does not work so clearly more work is needed.
>
Yeah. As I mentioned before patches 2/3 will not work.
I've tried to test suspend with diff I posted [1], but I did it only on
dra7 and am43 where suspend i more simple than on omap3. Also, I worry
that with such approach some irq can be missed (especially edge ones),
because PRCM irqs will be re-enabled at very late resume stage
(right before thaw).
Second option, I see, is to rework PRCM to be threaded IRQ, but in this case
all children IRQs will need to be threaded/nested threaded
(including PCS, legacy OMAP mux, OMAP3 _prcm_int_handle_wakeup/_prcm_int_handle_io).
Are there any objection to convert PCS to threaded IRQ, for example? ;)
[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/578915/
--
regards,
-grygorii
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: grygorii.strashko@ti.com (Grygorii Strashko)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP/pinmux: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:31:59 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56DEB82F.5050703@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160215152751.GT19432@atomide.com>
On 02/15/2016 10:27 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [160215 02:03]:
>> Hi Linus,
>>
>> On 13/02/16 14:42, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class
>>>> pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag
>>>> ARM: OMAP2+: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag
>>>>
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/mux.c | 4 ++--
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c | 9 ++++-----
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c | 1 +
>>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
>>>
>>> Are these patches orthogonal so I can merge the pinctrl patch independently
>>> of the OMAP patches if Tony ACKs this?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the follow up.
>> IIUC they are dependent and remember Tony/Grygorii wanted them to be
>> merged together(at-least for bisectibility)
>
> AFAIK this series needs to be kept together to keep things
> working.
>
>>> If not: should it be merged by me or through ARM SoC/Tony?
>>>
>>
>> I think so.
>>
>>> Anyways waiting for maintainer feedback, but the above is good to know.
>>>
>>
>> Grygorii was still not sure if this works and he couldn't give it a
>> test. He was traveling and may need more time to get back on this.
>
> He said it does not work so clearly more work is needed.
>
Yeah. As I mentioned before patches 2/3 will not work.
I've tried to test suspend with diff I posted [1], but I did it only on
dra7 and am43 where suspend i more simple than on omap3. Also, I worry
that with such approach some irq can be missed (especially edge ones),
because PRCM irqs will be re-enabled at very late resume stage
(right before thaw).
Second option, I see, is to rework PRCM to be threaded IRQ, but in this case
all children IRQs will need to be threaded/nested threaded
(including PCS, legacy OMAP mux, OMAP3 _prcm_int_handle_wakeup/_prcm_int_handle_io).
Are there any objection to convert PCS to threaded IRQ, for example? ;)
[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/578915/
--
regards,
-grygorii
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-08 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-01 18:28 [PATCH 0/3] OMAP/pinmux: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla
2016-02-01 18:28 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-02-01 18:28 ` [PATCH 1/3] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class Sudeep Holla
2016-02-01 18:28 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-03-08 11:32 ` Grygorii Strashko
2016-03-08 11:32 ` Grygorii Strashko
2016-03-11 16:04 ` Linus Walleij
2016-03-11 16:04 ` Linus Walleij
2016-02-01 18:28 ` [PATCH 2/3] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla
2016-02-01 18:28 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-02-01 18:28 ` [PATCH 3/3] ARM: OMAP2+: " Sudeep Holla
2016-02-01 18:28 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-02-04 13:14 ` Grygorii Strashko
2016-02-04 13:14 ` Grygorii Strashko
2016-02-04 13:34 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-02-04 13:34 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-02-13 14:42 ` [PATCH 0/3] OMAP/pinmux: " Linus Walleij
2016-02-13 14:42 ` Linus Walleij
2016-02-15 10:01 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-02-15 10:01 ` Sudeep Holla
2016-02-15 15:27 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-02-15 15:27 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-03-08 11:31 ` Grygorii Strashko [this message]
2016-03-08 11:31 ` Grygorii Strashko
2016-03-08 17:09 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-03-08 17:09 ` Tony Lindgren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56DEB82F.5050703@ti.com \
--to=grygorii.strashko@ti.com \
--cc=d-gerlach@ti.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=t-kristo@ti.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.