Re: [PATCH 15/17] ir-hix5hd2: drop the use of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND

[zhangfei <zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>]

On 09/23/2015 07:37 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
>
> On 23/09/15 15:26, zhangfei wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 09/21/2015 08:47 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> This driver doesn't claim the IR transmitter to be wakeup source. It
>>> even disables the clock and the IR during suspend-resume cycle.
>>>
>>> This patch removes yet another misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND.
>>>
>>> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@osg.samsung.com>
>>> Cc: Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>
>>> Cc: Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@st.com>
>>> Cc: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com>
>>> Cc: Guoxiong Yan <yanguoxiong@huawei.com>
>>> Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>

Acked-by: Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>

>>> ---
>>>    drivers/media/rc/ir-hix5hd2.c | 2 +-
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/ir-hix5hd2.c
>>> b/drivers/media/rc/ir-hix5hd2.c
>>> index 1c087cb76815..d0549fba711c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/media/rc/ir-hix5hd2.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/media/rc/ir-hix5hd2.c
>>> @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ static int hix5hd2_ir_probe(struct
>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>            goto clkerr;
>>>
>>>        if (devm_request_irq(dev, priv->irq, hix5hd2_ir_rx_interrupt,
>>> -                 IRQF_NO_SUSPEND, pdev->name, priv) < 0) {
>>> +                 0, pdev->name, priv) < 0) {
>>>            dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d register failed\n", priv->irq);
>>>            ret = -EINVAL;
>>>            goto regerr;
>>>
>>
>> ir is wakeup source for hix5hd2, so we use IRQF_NO_SUSPEND.
>
> OK, but from the existing implementation of suspend/resume callbacks, I
> read that the clocks as well as the IP block is powered off. Is part of
> the logic always-on ?
>
>> However, it is true the wakeup mechanism is not realized on hix5hd2 yet.
>
> OK, then I assume you can add the right APIs(enable_irq_wake and
> friends) when you add that feature.
>
>> I am fine with either using IRQF_NO_SUSPEND or not.
>>
>
> No using IRQF_NO_SUSPEND for wakeup is simply wrong and hence this patch
> series removes all those misuse. If you need it as wakeup, then you need
> to use right APIs for that. Since I don't see any support for wakeup in
> this driver I decided to just remove the flag. Please feel free to add
> the support making use of right APIs.

Thanks Sudeep for the kind info.
Yes, you are right.

Thanks