Am Montag, 26. Januar 2015, 08:24:03 schrieb Doug Anderson: > The Rockchip GPIO interrupt controller totally throws away all status > about an interrupt when you "disable" the interrupt. That has > unfortunate consequences in the following situation: > > 1. An edge-triggered interrupt is enabled and should wake the system. > 2. System suspend happens: interrupt is disabled and marked for wake. > 3. rockchip_irq_suspend() reenables the interrupt so we can wake. > 4. Interrupt happens when asleep. > 5. rockchip_irq_resume() redisables the interrupt. > 6. Disabling the interrupt throws away all status about it. > 7. Normal system resume happens and we enable the interrupt again, > since we threw away status about the interrupt we don't know it > fired while suspended. Even worse: if we need both edges of the > interrupt the logic to swap edges never runs. > > Note: even if we somehow can post the status about wakeup interrupts > in rockchip_irq_resume() we would still have a window of losing any > edges that came in while interrupts were disabled. > > If we use mask only then we don't need to worry. The GPIO Interrupt > controller keeps track of pending interrupts that are enabled and just > masked. > > There was no real strong reason to support the enable/disable > functionality (other than that it seemed right), so let's go back to > just supporting mask/unmask but actually map it to the real > mask/unmask. This ends up with slightly different (and more correct) > behavior than before (f2dd028 pinctrl: rockchip: Fix > enable/disable/mask/unmask). > > Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> I talked with Doug about it and this looks sane, so Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> Heiko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html