Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1623954 > unrolled thread

[PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

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.

Contents

  [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com - 2017-04-15 01:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first  level irq unmask Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org> - 2017-04-22 00:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level  irq unmask sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy          <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> - 2017-04-22 00:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level  irq unmask Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> - 2017-04-22 05:00 +0200
          Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first  level irq unmask Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2017-04-24 11:30 +0200
            Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level  irq unmask Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 11:50 +0200
              Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first  level irq unmask Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2017-04-24 14:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first  level irq unmask Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2017-04-24 11:30 +0200

#1623954 — [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>

Currently in WCOVE PMIC mfd driver, all second level irq chips
are chained to the respective first level irqs. So there is no
need for explicitly unmasking the first level irq in this
driver. This patches removes this level 1 irq unmask support.

Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/platform/x86/intel_bxtwc_tmu.c | 4 ----
 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

Changes since v1:
 * None

diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_bxtwc_tmu.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_bxtwc_tmu.c
index e202abd..ea865d4 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_bxtwc_tmu.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_bxtwc_tmu.c
@@ -92,10 +92,6 @@ static int bxt_wcove_tmu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	}
 	wctmu->irq = virq;
 
-	/* Enable TMU interrupts */
-	regmap_update_bits(wctmu->regmap, BXTWC_MIRQLVL1,
-				  BXTWC_MIRQLVL1_MTMU, 0);
-
 	/* Unmask TMU second level Wake & System alarm */
 	regmap_update_bits(wctmu->regmap, BXTWC_MTMUIRQ_REG,
 				  BXTWC_TMU_ALRM_MASK, 0);
-- 
2.7.4

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1628643 — Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 04:26:00PM -0700, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Currently in WCOVE PMIC mfd driver, all second level irq chips

By currently I believe you mean after the earlier patch in this series is
applied, correct? This one is dependent on the previous one?

> are chained to the respective first level irqs. So there is no
> need for explicitly unmasking the first level irq in this
> driver. This patches removes this level 1 irq unmask support.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>

For platform drivers x86:

Reviewed-by: Darren Hart (VMware) <dvhart@infradead.org>

Are you working with a specific maintainers to pull this in as a series? With so
many subsystems, we need to coordinate to make sure we don't make a mess for
Linus. Given the interdependencies, I'd recommend someone pull the series in as
a whole - maybe into MFD? Lee, do you have a preference?

-- 
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1628657 — Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

Hi Darren,

Thanks for the review.


On 04/21/2017 03:00 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 04:26:00PM -0700, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com wrote:
>> From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> Currently in WCOVE PMIC mfd driver, all second level irq chips
> By currently I believe you mean after the earlier patch in this series is
> applied, correct?
Yes.
> This one is dependent on the previous one?
Yes, one of my previous patch in this series fixes this problem in MFD 
driver.
>
>> are chained to the respective first level irqs. So there is no
>> need for explicitly unmasking the first level irq in this
>> driver. This patches removes this level 1 irq unmask support.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
> For platform drivers x86:
>
> Reviewed-by: Darren Hart (VMware) <dvhart@infradead.org>
>
> Are you working with a specific maintainers to pull this in as a series?
Thanks for brining it up. I was planning to ask either Andy or Lee 
regarding this issue after all patches in the series are reviewed.
> With so
> many subsystems, we need to coordinate to make sure we don't make a mess for
> Linus. Given the interdependencies, I'd recommend someone pull the series in as
> a whole - maybe into MFD? Lee, do you have a preference?
>

-- 
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Android kernel developer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1628747 — Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:34 AM, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> Thanks for brining it up. I was planning to ask either Andy or Lee regarding
> this issue after all patches in the series are reviewed.

Darren, I'm planning to review this soon.

P.S. We have few series flying around regarding to Intel PMIC(s): my
for Kconfig naming, Hans' for Crystal Cove (touches Kconfig as well),
and Sathya's series. I hope Lee can collect them in proper order.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1629358 — Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:34 AM, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
> <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for brining it up. I was planning to ask either Andy or Lee regarding
> > this issue after all patches in the series are reviewed.
> 
> Darren, I'm planning to review this soon.
> 
> P.S. We have few series flying around regarding to Intel PMIC(s): my
> for Kconfig naming, Hans' for Crystal Cove (touches Kconfig as well),
> and Sathya's series. I hope Lee can collect them in proper order.

That could be easier said than done.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1629369 — Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2017, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:34 AM, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
>> <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks for brining it up. I was planning to ask either Andy or Lee regarding
>> > this issue after all patches in the series are reviewed.
>>
>> Darren, I'm planning to review this soon.
>>
>> P.S. We have few series flying around regarding to Intel PMIC(s): my
>> for Kconfig naming, Hans' for Crystal Cove (touches Kconfig as well),
>> and Sathya's series. I hope Lee can collect them in proper order.
>
> That could be easier said than done.

Some of them are already in your tree, then apply
- my Kconfig patch which makes Broxton Whiskey Cove to be built
independently of Crystal Cove (I didn't notice that patch in your
tree, though some of your mail told it had been applied)
- Hans' series regarding CherryTrail Whiskey Cove support (if it has all ACKs)
- this series after my review.

Does it sound doable?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1629480 — Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

On Mon, 24 Apr 2017, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2017, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:34 AM, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
> >> <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thanks for brining it up. I was planning to ask either Andy or Lee regarding
> >> > this issue after all patches in the series are reviewed.
> >>
> >> Darren, I'm planning to review this soon.
> >>
> >> P.S. We have few series flying around regarding to Intel PMIC(s): my
> >> for Kconfig naming, Hans' for Crystal Cove (touches Kconfig as well),
> >> and Sathya's series. I hope Lee can collect them in proper order.
> >
> > That could be easier said than done.
> 
> Some of them are already in your tree, then apply
> - my Kconfig patch which makes Broxton Whiskey Cove to be built
> independently of Crystal Cove (I didn't notice that patch in your
> tree, though some of your mail told it had been applied)
> - Hans' series regarding CherryTrail Whiskey Cove support (if it has all ACKs)
> - this series after my review.
> 
> Does it sound doable?

My Inbox is now empty, so all patches are now either applied or
waiting further Acks/Actions.

I'm pretty certain that this set is not going in before v4.13.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1629357 — Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first level irq unmask

On Fri, 21 Apr 2017, Darren Hart wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 04:26:00PM -0700, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com wrote:
> > From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > Currently in WCOVE PMIC mfd driver, all second level irq chips
> 
> By currently I believe you mean after the earlier patch in this series is
> applied, correct? This one is dependent on the previous one?
> 
> > are chained to the respective first level irqs. So there is no
> > need for explicitly unmasking the first level irq in this
> > driver. This patches removes this level 1 irq unmask support.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
> 
> For platform drivers x86:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Darren Hart (VMware) <dvhart@infradead.org>
> 
> Are you working with a specific maintainers to pull this in as a series? With so
> many subsystems, we need to coordinate to make sure we don't make a mess for
> Linus. Given the interdependencies, I'd recommend someone pull the series in as
> a whole - maybe into MFD? Lee, do you have a preference?

I am happy to take the set, however I think v4.12 is an unlikely
candidate, since there still have quite a few patches which are yet to
receive review and the merge-window opens in 6 days.

Once we have all the required Acks, I'll push the set into -next where
it can sit for a good soak test until v4.13.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web