Hi Aubrey, On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:42:24AM +0800, 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 me, I have key which is interrupt based from PMIC, not based on GPIO > >>> and on that if I set it to IRQF_EARLY_RESUME then it works fine. > >>> > >> IRQF_NO_SUSPEND - Do not disable this IRQ during suspend > >> IRQF_EARLY_RESUME - Resume IRQ early during syscore instead of at device > >> resume time. > >> > >> IRQF_NO_SUSPEND is exactly what I want, instead of IRQF_EARLY_RESUME. > >> Can you please send your proposal/code to help me understand why this > >> has to hw specific and why IRQF_EARLY_RESUME is better than > >> IRQF_NO_SUSPEND? > > > > IRQF_EARLY_RESUME helps to re-enable mask or irq before parent interrupt > > resume and so parent isr handler sees the irq flag enabled when it try > > to scan source of interrupt. Otherwise parent isr handler treat this as > > spurious interrupt and does not call handler as irq flag disabled for that. > > > > This only happen when on resume, parent inettrupt enabled before the > > child interrupt on irq resume. Because as soon as parent isr re-enabled > > on resume, its hadnler get called before actually child interrupt > > enabled. This is what I observed mainly on PMIC and its sub irq. Not > > observed on SoC level of interrupts. > > > > 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. The driver does call enable_irq_wake() in its suspend routine to prepare the interrupt in question to be used as a wakeup source. Why isn't it enough? It seems to me that your platform code should properly handle this case instead of relying on the driver to modify IRQ flags. Thanks. -- Dmitry -- 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
