From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756083AbbLDLTJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 06:19:09 -0500 Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:53707 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752356AbbLDLTG (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 06:19:06 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag To: Sudeep Holla , Tony Lindgren 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> <56608B72.1040101@ti.com> <20151203213715.GA23396@atomide.com> <56616E74.9000604@ti.com> <566170D5.2070309@arm.com> CC: Linus Walleij , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , From: Grygorii Strashko Message-ID: <566176A2.3010101@ti.com> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:18:58 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <566170D5.2070309@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/04/2015 12:54 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Hi Grygorii, > > On 04/12/15 10:44, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >> On 12/03/2015 11:37 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > [...] > >>> And these both need to be applied together when we have a fix for the >>> above >>> as otherwise we'll get the lock recursion Sudeep mentioned in patch 2/2. >>> >> >> Most probably below diff will fix above issue: >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c >> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c >> index 3fc2cbe..69cde67 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c >> @@ -338,6 +338,7 @@ int omap_prcm_register_chain_handler(struct >> omap_prcm_irq_setup *irq_setup) >> ct->chip.irq_ack = irq_gc_ack_set_bit; >> ct->chip.irq_mask = irq_gc_mask_clr_bit; >> ct->chip.irq_unmask = irq_gc_mask_set_bit; >> + ct->chip.flags = IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE; > > Thanks for testing. Sry, I've not tested it yet - it's just fast assumption :( In that case without this hunk, we should get error > from pcs_irq_set_wake in the suspend path. No ? May be driver is not > checking the error value and entering suspend. > Yep. Noone is checking return result from enable_irq_wake() in suspend path (see dev_pm_arm_wake_irq()). Actually, return result of enable_irq_wake() is checked only in ~30% of cases in kernel now :) -- regards, -grygorii