From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] mmc: omap_hsmmc: Enable SDIO IRQ. Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 08:33:32 -0800 Message-ID: <20140305163331.GC4983@atomide.com> References: <1393331866-28307-1-git-send-email-afenkart@gmail.com> <1393331866-28307-2-git-send-email-afenkart@gmail.com> <20140227213335.GJ11654@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Fenkart Cc: Chris Ball , Grant Likely , Felipe Balbi , Balaji T K , Daniel Mack , Kumar Gala , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc , linux-omap List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org * Andreas Fenkart [140305 00:30]: > Hi, > > 2014-02-27 22:33 GMT+01:00 Tony Lindgren : > > > > Thanks for updating this, I finally got around to spend some > > time with it again. I've folded in your fixes and quirk support > > into my earlier patch from [0] as that had a better changelog > > describing the earlier work. > thanks, always struggled with that > > > And I've also now made the SDIO support to depend on properly > > configured wake-up irq from device tree as otherwise wake from > > idle states won't work properly. I've also cleaned up the the > > wake-up irq initialization a bit. > Looks much better now. > > Mind that the sdio irq is level triggered. So we have to disable the > IRQ in the handler otherwise we enter an infinite loop. Oh OK, I was trying to get rid of all the extra flags. But it seem we may still need the wake_irq enabled status bit then. > > The wake-irq is needed for omaps with wake-up path and also > > when doing GPIO remuxing. So the wake-up handling is pretty > > much the same for both cases. > I added this comment to the patch, since I was puzzled that you need > a wake_irq even whithout remuxing. Yeah we need it because omap_hsmmc is already doing runtime PM, so there's nothing stopping from shutting it down. And there's really no need to block runtime PM for it as it's working. > > I've kept your Signed-off-by, can you please check if the patch > > below works for you with the second patch I'll post shortly? > > Will send out another patch soon. Left your Signed-off as well, not > in the sense of your agreement, but didn't dare to remove it because > of your contributions. Yeah thanks will try to test it today :) Regards, Tony > > [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org/msg22290.html