From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756450AbbLDRGV (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 12:06:21 -0500 Received: from muru.com ([72.249.23.125]:50857 "EHLO muru.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756425AbbLDRGR (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 12:06:17 -0500 Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 09:06:13 -0800 From: Tony Lindgren To: Sudeep Holla Cc: Grygorii Strashko , Linus Walleij , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Message-ID: <20151204170613.GJ23396@atomide.com> References: <1448644860-29323-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1448644860-29323-2-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20151203181337.GV23396@atomide.com> <566090FC.1020502@arm.com> <20151203214013.GB23396@atomide.com> <20151204154031.GG23396@atomide.com> <5661B4E7.2040405@arm.com> <5661BD22.7080600@ti.com> <5661BEBF.9000106@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5661BEBF.9000106@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Sudeep Holla [151204 08:27]: > > > On 04/12/15 16:19, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > >On 12/04/2015 05:44 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > >> > >> > >>On 04/12/15 15:40, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>>* Tony Lindgren [151203 13:41]: > >>>>* Sudeep Holla [151203 11:00]: > >>>>> > >>>>>I have added irq_set_irq_wake(pcs_soc->irq, state) in pcs_irq_set_wake > >>>>>which ensures it's marked for wakeup. > >>>> > >>>>Hmm well see the error I pasted in this thread, maybe that provides > >>>>more clues. > >>> > >>>The irq_set_irq_wake(pcs_soc->irq, state) in pcs_irq_set_wake does not > >>>look right to me as pcs_irq_set_wake toggles the irq_wake for each pin > >>>separately, not for the whole controller. > >>> > >> > >>OK, my understanding was that this driver supports multiple single > >>pinmux with one main irq `pcs_soc->irq`. Hence I added the wakeup on > >>that irq. I now think that understand is wrong. > >> > > > >With this change, PCS parent IRQ will be marked as wake up source as many > >times as many pins were requested as wake up IRQs (protected by counter). > >Most of all GPIO IRQ chips work this way. > >Of course, if we will look on pinctrl-single.c from only OMAP point of view > >then Prent IRQ can be marked as wake up source from probe only once. > >But, since this driver expected to be generic - this patch is more correct, > >because other HW may require to perform some real HW re-configuration to > >enable/disable wake up capabilities for Parent IRQ in Parent IRQ controller. > > > > Thanks for the detailed explanation. I was bit confused if my > understanding is correct or not. > > >Any way, in my opinion, it's right and more safe to manage all wakeup IRQs > >through IRQ PM core and Device wakeirq framework. And this patch should just > >go together with platform changes and not alone. OK yeah if it's a counter then it makes sense to me. > Agreed, since I don't have platform to test, I will leave it you guys to > pick up these patches when ready and with any changes if required. Yeah probably best that Grygorii tries to sort it out :) Regards, Tony