From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:04:14 +0530 Subject: [PATCH V3 39/63] GIC: Added dummy handlers for PowerManagementSuspend Resume In-Reply-To: <20101220122858.GE28157@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <674f9b1ab90602072d7adcd856453380ed21872b.1292833229.git.viresh.kumar@st.com> <20101220111056.GB28157@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4D0F3EC1.5030207@st.com> <20101220114948.GC28157@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <53375b410d360c4155c4c4e978be9d78@mail.gmail.com> <20101220122858.GE28157@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <3f7fa8ffdb0ccbbdd018360e6e334b85@mail.gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Russell King - ARM Linux [mailto:linux at arm.linux.org.uk] > Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 5:59 PM > To: Santosh Shilimkar > Cc: viresh kumar; Rajeev KUMAR; Armando VISCONTI; Vipin KUMAR; Shiraz > HASHIM; Amit VIRDI; Vipul Kumar SAMAR; Deepak SIKRI; linux-arm- > kernel at lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 39/63] GIC: Added dummy handlers for > PowerManagementSuspend Resume > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 05:50:37PM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: linux-arm-kernel-bounces at lists.infradead.org [mailto:linux-arm- > > > kernel-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Russell King - ARM > > Linux > > > Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 5:20 PM > > > To: viresh kumar > > > Cc: Rajeev KUMAR; Armando VISCONTI; Vipin KUMAR; Shiraz HASHIM; Amit > > > VIRDI; Vipul Kumar SAMAR; Deepak SIKRI; linux-arm- > > > kernel at lists.infradead.org > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 39/63] GIC: Added dummy handlers for Power > > > ManagementSuspend Resume > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 05:02:17PM +0530, viresh kumar wrote: > > > > On 12/20/2010 04:40 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > > And still this patch gets reposted a few more times despite my > > > > > objections: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100920.150749.c97eda0d.en.h > > > tml > > > > > > > > Russell, > > > > > > > > Actually, when we discussed all this, we didn't came to any > > conclusion, > > > > and so i asked you: should we go ahead with this patch or drop it? > > > > > > Yes, I didn't bother replying any further because it seemed that no > one > > > was listening to me. > > > > > > I think over the four or five emails my position on the patch was > pretty > > > clear: I do _not_ like it one bit, and I still do not like it. > > > > > > It is a hack, plain and simple. You're adding code to misrepresent > what > > > the hardware can do. You're fooling the system into thinking that the > > > GIC can control wake-up sources, when in fact the GIC has zero wakeup > > > capabilities what so ever. > > > > > > As I pointed out in the message above, if you do this, then drivers > have > > > NO WAY to detect whether the interrupt controller they're connected to > > > is wake-up capable or not. > > > > > > > > > http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100920.134808.634d6ea1.en.h > > > tml > > > > > > I still don't know what your driver code looks like, yet I've given > you > > > a suggestion to solve your problem in a subsequent reply (see the URL > > > at the top of this message) which never really got a reply from you. > > > > > > It seems to me that as soon as I asked for driver code, ST lost all > > > interest in discussing the issue any further, as there was no further > > > technical discussion coming from _any_ ST people. > > > > > Just for information, we did found a serial driver BUG > > is similar aspect. Below is the thread. > > http://ns3.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg41240.html > > So, the serial_core layer isn't properly tracking whether > enable_irq_wake() > succeeded, and is then calling disable_irq_wake(). That's a bug in > the serial_core layer which needs fixing. Patch is already posted for this on serial list. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-serial/msg03156.html