On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Gregory Fong <gregory.0xf0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > For wake from S5, we need to: > - register a reboot handler > - set wakeup capability before requesting IRQ so wakeup count is > incremented > - mask all GPIO IRQs and clear any pending interrupts during driver > probe to since no driver will yet be registered to handle any IRQs > carried over from boot at that time, and it's possible that the > booted kernel does not request the same IRQ anyway. > > This means that /sys/.../power/wakeup_count is valid at boot time, and > we can properly account for S5 wakeup stats. e.g.: > > ### After waking from S5 from a GPIO key > # cat /sys/bus/platform/drivers/brcmstb-gpio/f04172c0.gpio/power/wakeup > enabled > # cat /sys/bus/platform/drivers/brcmstb-gpio/f04172c0.gpio/power/wakeup_count > 1 > > Signed-off-by: Gregory Fong <gregory.0xf0@xxxxxxxxx> (...) > -static int brcmstb_gpio_irq_set_wake(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int enable) > +static int __brcmstb_gpio_irq_set_wake(struct brcmstb_gpio_priv *priv, > + unsigned int enable) > { > - struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d); > - struct brcmstb_gpio_priv *priv = brcmstb_gpio_gc_to_priv(gc); > int ret = 0; I don't usually like to refactor code with __foo wrapper functions with underscores or double underscores in front of them. Is it possible to give this a more unique name? > + /* > + * Mask all interrupts by default, since wakeup interrupts may > + * be retained from S5 cold boot > + */ > + bank->bgc.write_reg(reg_base + GIO_MASK(bank->id), 0); Aha I see, that's some clever code, nice. Yours, Linus Walleij -- 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