Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1280890 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-12-01 15:10 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-12-04 18:20 +0100 |
| Articles | 3 on this page of 23 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> - 2015-12-01 15:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-03 19:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com> - 2015-12-03 19:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-03 22:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com> - 2015-12-04 11:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-04 12:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com> - 2015-12-04 12:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-04 12:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-04 16:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com> - 2015-12-04 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-04 17:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com> - 2015-12-04 17:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-04 18:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-04 18:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-03 20:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-03 22:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-04 16:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-04 16:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com> - 2015-12-04 17:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-04 17:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-04 18:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-04 17:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-04 18:20 +0100
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 18:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag |
| Message-ID | <qC21T-5zk-73@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1283985 |
* Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [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 <tony@atomide.com> [151203 13:41]: > >>>>* Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 17:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag |
| Message-ID | <qC1ft-50Q-33@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1283952 |
Hi Tony, On 04/12/15 15:40, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [151203 13:41]: >> * Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [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. > After thinking more about it we need some way to tell IRQ core that pcs_soc->irq is wakeup capable. Is that going to happen automatically via dev_pm_set_dedicated_wake_irq as you mentioned earlier ? > I think all that can be left out with the snipped from Grygorii, and maybe > also the lock_class_key changes. > If we not calling irq_set_irq_wake(pcs_soc->irq) in pcs_irq_set_wake, do you see possibility of lockdep recursion in any other paths. Otherwise we don't need this if we remove irq_set_irq_wake(pcs_soc->irq) from pcs_irq_set_wake -- Regards, Sudeep -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 18:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag |
| Message-ID | <qC2bw-5CT-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1283980 |
* Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [151204 08:16]: > Hi Tony, > > On 04/12/15 15:40, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [151203 13:41]: > >>* Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [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. > > > > After thinking more about it we need some way to tell IRQ core that > pcs_soc->irq is wakeup capable. Is that going to happen automatically > via dev_pm_set_dedicated_wake_irq as you mentioned earlier ? > > >I think all that can be left out with the snipped from Grygorii, and maybe > >also the lock_class_key changes. > > > > If we not calling irq_set_irq_wake(pcs_soc->irq) in pcs_irq_set_wake, do > you see possibility of lockdep recursion in any other paths. > > Otherwise we don't need this if we remove irq_set_irq_wake(pcs_soc->irq) > from pcs_irq_set_wake I think Grygorii is right here and this is correct as it's a counter once the other issues are sorted out and we have figured out what all needs to be patched together. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web