On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 12:07:53PM -0600, Raul Rangel wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:26 AM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 04:13:11PM -0600, Raul E Rangel wrote: > > > Device tree already has a mechanism to pass the wake_irq. It does this > > > by looking for the wakeup-source property and setting the > > > I2C_CLIENT_WAKE flag. This CL adds the ACPI equivalent. It uses the > > > ACPI interrupt wake flag to determine if the interrupt can be used to > > > wake the system. Previously the i2c drivers had to make assumptions and > > > blindly enable the wake IRQ. This can cause spurious wake events. e.g., > > > If there is a device with an Active Low interrupt and the device gets > > > powered off while suspending, the interrupt line will go low since it's > > > no longer powered and wakes the system. For this reason we should > > > respect the board designers wishes and honor the wake bit defined on the > > > interrupt. > > > > > > + if (irq > 0 && acpi_wake_capable) > > > + client->flags |= I2C_CLIENT_WAKE; > > > > Why do we need a parameter and can't simply set this flag inside the callee? > > Are you suggesting `i2c_acpi_get_irq` modify the `client->flags`? IMO > that's a little surprising since the I wouldn't expect a `get` > function to modify it's parameters. I'm fine implementing it if others > agree though. This is similar to what of_i2c_get_board_info() does, no? Note: _get_ there. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
