Hi Marc, On 17/03/16 15:02, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Hi Jon, > > On 17/03/16 14:19, Jon Hunter wrote: >> Some IRQ chips may be located in a power domain outside of the CPU >> subsystem and hence will require device specific runtime power >> management. In order to support such IRQ chips, add a pointer for a >> device structure to the irq_chip structure, and if this pointer is >> populated by the IRQ chip driver and CONFIG_PM is selected in the kernel >> configuration, then the pm_runtime_get/put APIs for this chip will be >> called when an IRQ is requested/freed, respectively. >> >> When entering system suspend and each interrupt is disabled if there is >> no wake-up set for that interrupt. For an IRQ chip that utilises runtime >> power management, print a warning message for each active interrupt that >> has no wake-up set because these interrupts may be unnecessarily keeping >> the IRQ chip enabled during system suspend. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> include/linux/irq.h | 5 +++++ >> kernel/irq/chip.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> kernel/irq/internals.h | 1 + >> kernel/irq/manage.c | 14 +++++++++++--- >> kernel/irq/pm.c | 3 +++ >> 5 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/irq.h b/include/linux/irq.h >> index c4de62348ff2..82f36390048d 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/irq.h >> +++ b/include/linux/irq.h >> @@ -315,6 +315,7 @@ static inline irq_hw_number_t irqd_to_hwirq(struct irq_data *d) >> /** >> * struct irq_chip - hardware interrupt chip descriptor >> * >> + * @parent: pointer to associated device >> * @name: name for /proc/interrupts >> * @irq_startup: start up the interrupt (defaults to ->enable if NULL) >> * @irq_shutdown: shut down the interrupt (defaults to ->disable if NULL) >> @@ -354,6 +355,7 @@ static inline irq_hw_number_t irqd_to_hwirq(struct irq_data *d) >> * @flags: chip specific flags >> */ >> struct irq_chip { >> + struct device *parent; > > Nit: Please don't call this just "parent". We have parent fields in > irq_data and irq_domain structures, and they always are a pointer to the > same type, indicating some form of stacking. Here, we're pointing to a > different type altogether... > > How about calling it "dev", or "device" instead? It would make it much > clearer that when crossing that pointer, we're in another subsystem > altogether. I will defer to Linus W here, as it was his request we make this 'parent' and not 'dev'. See ... http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145035839623442&w=2 > I'll come back to the rest of the patch a bit later, but I wanted to put > that one out right away... ;-) Thanks, Jon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html