From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: "Raja, Govindraj" <govindraj.raja@ti.com>
Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: omap-serial: Keep the wakeup mechanism enabled by default
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 07:21:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mx69nms2.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMrsUdL1S5GiyG0egS=CHg2fdNkyZVF-wuCNGDg547kfTUODng@mail.gmail.com> (Govindraj Raja's message of "Wed, 18 Apr 2012 18:46:31 +0530")
"Raja, Govindraj" <govindraj.raja@ti.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
>> "Govindraj.R" <govindraj.raja@ti.com> writes:
>>
>>> From: "Govindraj.R" <govindraj.raja@ti.com>
>>>
>>> The wakeups can be left enabled by default and should be disabled
>>> only when disabled from sysfs and while entering suspend.
>>
>> Left enabled? That assumes something else has initizlied them, but we
>> can't make that assumption.
>>
>> First, wakeups should be disabled when ->probe has finished. Then,
>> they should be enabled whenever driver is in use, and disabled when
>> the driver is not in use.
>>
>> I'm not familiar enough with uart_ops, but it looks like they should
>> probably be enabled in uart_ops->startup and disabled in
>> uart_ops->shutdown.
>
> uart_ops->shutdown gets called in suspend path also
> serial_omap_suspend => uart_suspend_port = > ops->shutdown(uport);
>
> This will leave uart wakeup disabled in suspend path.
As I said, I'm not familiar enough with uart_ops to know which are the
right ones.
Maybe ->request_port and ->release_port are the right ones?
The point is that wakeups should be enabled whenever driver is in use,
and disabled when the driver is not in use.
Kevin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@ti.com (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] tty: omap-serial: Keep the wakeup mechanism enabled by default
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 07:21:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mx69nms2.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMrsUdL1S5GiyG0egS=CHg2fdNkyZVF-wuCNGDg547kfTUODng@mail.gmail.com> (Govindraj Raja's message of "Wed, 18 Apr 2012 18:46:31 +0530")
"Raja, Govindraj" <govindraj.raja@ti.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
>> "Govindraj.R" <govindraj.raja@ti.com> writes:
>>
>>> From: "Govindraj.R" <govindraj.raja@ti.com>
>>>
>>> The wakeups can be left enabled by default and should be disabled
>>> only when disabled from sysfs and while entering suspend.
>>
>> Left enabled? ?That assumes something else has initizlied them, but we
>> can't make that assumption.
>>
>> First, wakeups should be disabled when ->probe has finished. ?Then,
>> they should be enabled whenever driver is in use, and disabled when
>> the driver is not in use.
>>
>> I'm not familiar enough with uart_ops, but it looks like they should
>> probably be enabled in uart_ops->startup and disabled in
>> uart_ops->shutdown.
>
> uart_ops->shutdown gets called in suspend path also
> serial_omap_suspend => uart_suspend_port = > ops->shutdown(uport);
>
> This will leave uart wakeup disabled in suspend path.
As I said, I'm not familiar enough with uart_ops to know which are the
right ones.
Maybe ->request_port and ->release_port are the right ones?
The point is that wakeups should be enabled whenever driver is in use,
and disabled when the driver is not in use.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-18 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-16 12:30 [PATCH] tty: omap-serial: Keep the wakeup mechanism enabled by default Govindraj.R
2012-04-16 12:30 ` Govindraj.R
2012-04-17 23:25 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-17 23:25 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-18 13:16 ` Raja, Govindraj
2012-04-18 13:16 ` Raja, Govindraj
2012-04-18 14:21 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2012-04-18 14:21 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-04-18 15:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-18 15:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-18 19:08 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-18 19:08 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-19 14:30 ` Raja, Govindraj
2012-04-19 14:30 ` Raja, Govindraj
2012-04-20 9:13 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-20 9:13 ` Alan Cox
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=87mx69nms2.fsf@ti.com \
--to=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=govindraj.raja@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@pwsan.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.