On 2014/4/18 1:18, Laxman Dewangan wrote: > On Thursday 17 April 2014 10:12 PM, Li, Aubrey wrote: >> On 2014/4/16 20:35, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 09:48 PM, Li, Aubrey wrote: >>>> On 2014/4/15 20:38, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>>> On Monday 14 April 2014 09:12 PM, Li, Aubrey wrote: >>>>>> ping... >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2014/4/10 18:48, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: >>>>> I think when we say irq_wake_enable() then based on underlying HW, it >>>>> should not turn off the irq if it is require for the wakeup. I mean it >>>>> need to be handle in the hw specific callbacks to keep enabling the >>>>> wakeup irq on suspend also. >>>> I failed to see why this can't be generic to all of the GPIO buttons >>>> for >>>> suspend wakeup. Do you see any cases broken by this proposal? >>> My point here is that if underlying HW needs to have irq enabled for >>> wakup then it need to handle in centralized location i.e. the driver >>> which is implementing it for the irq callbacks. >>> Otherwise, we need to change this on multiple places who needs wakeups >>> which is vast in nature like sd driver for sdcard insert/remove etc. >>> almost all drivers which need wakeups through GPIOs. >> I think we have to handle this driver by driver. I didn't see how can we >> make it in a centralized location. Looking forward to see your proposal. > > For Tegra SoC, we have implemented this such that we keep re-enabe > interrupts when going to suspend. That's why my point is. > May be your SoC ha implemented on different way and hence it is require > NO_SUSPEND. > > I do not have any negative remark here, I jut kept my point here. I see. thanks for your point. > >> This is expected behavior. I think I still need IRQF_NO_SUSPEND here. >> What I want is, this IRQ is able to generate pm wakeup event to wake the >> system up. It's enough for my case. >> >> Did you see a failing case of my patch? > > Nop, I have not tested the patch and I think it will not break anything > for me with your patch. Good to hear it. Thanks, -Aubrey > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and > may contain > confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > distribution > is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact > the sender by > reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
