From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@dowhile0.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: OMAP3: PM: don't explicitly enable the IO-chain interrupt
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 07:55:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87obo2mg61.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1340933123-30401-1-git-send-email-javier@dowhile0.org> (Javier Martinez Canillas's message of "Fri, 29 Jun 2012 03:25:23 +0200")
+Paul
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@dowhile0.org> writes:
> commit 99b59df0 ARM: OMAP3: PM: fix shared PRCM interrupt leave disabled at boot
>
> set the IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag to the PCRM IO-chain irq to avoid this
> interrupt until the PM core code is ready to handle the interrupts.
>
> It seems that this is not needed anymore after the OMAP PRCM I/O chain
> code re-implementation introduced on merge commit:
>
> 9a17d88 Merge tag 'omap-devel-c-for-3.6' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/
>
> The IRQ_NOAUTOEN flags is not set for the PRCM I/O irq anymore on the
> new implementation. This has the effect that a request_irq() for the
> PRCM I/O chain irq will auto-enable the requested IRQ and a later call
> to enable_irq() will lead to the following warning:
I noticed that warning too, but I don't think $SUBJECT patch is the
right fix.
We still need the IRQ_NOAUTOEN so that cases where PM is not enabled,
the IO chain interrupts are not enabled.
Looking closer, it looks like the merge of omap-devel-c-for-3.6 removed
the IRQ_NOAUTOEN in the merge resolution, which wasn't right.
I'll cook up a fix for this.
Kevin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@ti.com (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: OMAP3: PM: don't explicitly enable the IO-chain interrupt
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 07:55:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87obo2mg61.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1340933123-30401-1-git-send-email-javier@dowhile0.org> (Javier Martinez Canillas's message of "Fri, 29 Jun 2012 03:25:23 +0200")
+Paul
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@dowhile0.org> writes:
> commit 99b59df0 ARM: OMAP3: PM: fix shared PRCM interrupt leave disabled at boot
>
> set the IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag to the PCRM IO-chain irq to avoid this
> interrupt until the PM core code is ready to handle the interrupts.
>
> It seems that this is not needed anymore after the OMAP PRCM I/O chain
> code re-implementation introduced on merge commit:
>
> 9a17d88 Merge tag 'omap-devel-c-for-3.6' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/
>
> The IRQ_NOAUTOEN flags is not set for the PRCM I/O irq anymore on the
> new implementation. This has the effect that a request_irq() for the
> PRCM I/O chain irq will auto-enable the requested IRQ and a later call
> to enable_irq() will lead to the following warning:
I noticed that warning too, but I don't think $SUBJECT patch is the
right fix.
We still need the IRQ_NOAUTOEN so that cases where PM is not enabled,
the IO chain interrupts are not enabled.
Looking closer, it looks like the merge of omap-devel-c-for-3.6 removed
the IRQ_NOAUTOEN in the merge resolution, which wasn't right.
I'll cook up a fix for this.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-29 12:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-29 1:25 [PATCH 1/1] ARM: OMAP3: PM: don't explicitly enable the IO-chain interrupt Javier Martinez Canillas
2012-06-29 1:25 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2012-06-29 12:55 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2012-06-29 12:55 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-06-29 13:25 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2012-06-29 13:25 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2012-06-29 14:07 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-06-29 14:07 ` Kevin Hilman
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=87obo2mg61.fsf@ti.com \
--to=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=javier@dowhile0.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=paul@pwsan.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.