From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAA8AC433F5 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2022 09:51:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230158AbiJCJvs (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2022 05:51:48 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40884 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230055AbiJCJv2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2022 05:51:28 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8932225A; Mon, 3 Oct 2022 02:51:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1664790687; x=1696326687; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=0eSz7DO9mySO5jeTWFNlmR0B7bVjcdWTwf4B5JeJd14=; b=H9D9cK+NErNt5WNrJXG5/Kqp+VrSKsmBW4wY+WIlxhDiE/xrsSYm61z6 NKu+VfmWAqpAd4hCsngVYJgczfxQBaNbbYUL6QnGYntdCHXJwdpcSAKUu oLumA7mrfmzhnyikruat6zGOUzeFs9uMjc0+feUWFVDT5nEQzBst4vQxd DJTGg53IeHgB96Q/f8N2BT8+5zFg3+y8kz0R+/3jb6W5Mcqoe+o6E7Pot CTDx4lSl7Ish6Jndt5rHCZJX1ZpgsaFwsanu8bZwdohPINbl9IB1+neR5 2ud6KyUNP3Jvm+xMNgRunPgZuYWX+eg9x+Tl2km4NnkHdwLJgjl2NW6fE Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10488"; a="366636289" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,365,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="366636289" Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Oct 2022 02:51:27 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10488"; a="623472682" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,365,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="623472682" Received: from rladysz-mobl2.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.252.38.50]) by orsmga002-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Oct 2022 02:51:22 -0700 Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 12:51:23 +0300 (EEST) From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= To: Kumaravel Thiagarajan cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , andy.shevchenko@gmail.com, u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, johan@kernel.org, wander@redhat.com, etremblay@distech-controls.com, macro@orcam.me.uk, geert+renesas@glider.be, jk@ozlabs.org, phil.edworthy@renesas.com, Lukas Wunner , LKML , linux-serial , UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 tty-next 3/3] 8250: microchip: pci1xxxx: Add power management functions to quad-uart driver. In-Reply-To: <20221001061507.3508603-4-kumaravel.thiagarajan@microchip.com> Message-ID: <7892467b-c2de-c62-e977-62761dc5cbb@linux.intel.com> References: <20221001061507.3508603-1-kumaravel.thiagarajan@microchip.com> <20221001061507.3508603-4-kumaravel.thiagarajan@microchip.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 1 Oct 2022, Kumaravel Thiagarajan wrote: > pci1xxxx's quad-uart function has the capability to wake up the host from > suspend state. Enable wakeup before entering into suspend and disable > wakeup on resume. > > Signed-off-by: Kumaravel Thiagarajan > --- > Changes in v2: > - Use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS instead of SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS. > - Use pm_sleep_ptr instead of CONFIG_PM_SLEEP. > - Change the return data type of pci1xxxx_port_suspend to bool from int. > --- > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci1xxxx.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 112 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci1xxxx.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci1xxxx.c > index 999e5a284266..0a0459f66177 100644 > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci1xxxx.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci1xxxx.c > @@ -352,6 +352,112 @@ static void pci1xxxx_irq_assign(struct pci1xxxx_8250 *priv, > } > } > > +static bool pci1xxxx_port_suspend(int line) > +{ > + struct uart_8250_port *up = serial8250_get_port(line); > + struct uart_port *port = &up->port; > + unsigned long flags; > + u8 wakeup_mask; > + bool ret = false; > + > + if (port->suspended == 0 && port->dev) { > + wakeup_mask = readb(up->port.membase + UART_WAKE_MASK_REG); > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags); > + port->mctrl &= ~TIOCM_OUT2; > + port->ops->set_mctrl(port, port->mctrl); > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags); > + > + if ((wakeup_mask & UART_WAKE_SRCS) != UART_WAKE_SRCS) > + ret = true; > + } > + > + writeb(UART_WAKE_SRCS, port->membase + UART_WAKE_REG); > + > + return ret; > +} > + > +static void pci1xxxx_port_resume(int line) > +{ > + struct uart_8250_port *up = serial8250_get_port(line); > + struct uart_port *port = &up->port; > + unsigned long flags; > + > + writeb(UART_WAKE_SRCS, port->membase + UART_WAKE_REG); > + > + if (port->suspended == 0) { Is this check the right way around? > + spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags); > + port->mctrl |= TIOCM_OUT2; > + port->ops->set_mctrl(port, port->mctrl); > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags); > + } > +} > + > +static int pci1xxxx_suspend(struct device *dev) > +{ > + struct pci1xxxx_8250 *priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > + struct pci_dev *pcidev = to_pci_dev(dev); > + unsigned int data; > + void __iomem *p; > + bool wakeup = false; > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < priv->nr; i++) { > + if (priv->line[i] >= 0) { > + serial8250_suspend_port(priv->line[i]); > + wakeup |= pci1xxxx_port_suspend(priv->line[i]); So first serial8250_suspend_port() calls into uart_suspend_port() that sets port->suspended to 1, then pci1xxxx_port_suspend() checks if it's 0. Is this intentional? -- i.