25.07.2019 13:38, Peter De Schrijver пишет: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 01:33:48PM +0300, Peter De Schrijver wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 01:05:13PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>> 25.07.2019 12:55, Peter De Schrijver пишет: >>>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 12:54:51PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>> >>>>> All Tegra SoCs support SC7, hence the 'supports_sc7' and the comment >>>>> doesn't sound correct to me. Something like 'firmware_sc7' should suit >>>>> better here. >>>>> >>>>>> + writel_relaxed(~0ul, ictlr + ICTLR_COP_IER_CLR); >>>>> >>>>> Secondly, I'm also not sure why COP interrupts need to be disabled for >>>>> pre-T210 at all, since COP is unused. This looks to me like it was >>>>> cut-n-pasted from downstream kernel without a good reason and could be >>>>> simply removed. >>>> >>>> I don't think we can rely on the fact that COP is unused. People can >>>> write their own code to run on COP. >>> >>> 1. Not upstream - doesn't matter. >>> >> >> The code is not part of the kernel, so obviously it's not upstream? >> >>> 2. That's not very good if something unknown is running on COP and then >>> kernel suddenly intervenes, don't you think so? >> >> Unless the code was written with this in mind. >> In that case, please see 1. ;) > > Looking at this again, I don't think we need to enable the IRQ at all. Could you please clarify? The code only saves/restores COP's interrupts context across suspend-resume. Again, that's absolutely useless code for the upstream kernel which could be removed safely to avoid the confusion, IMHO. I can type a patch if you're agreeing.
