Hi Marc,
On 17/03/16 15:02, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> On 17/03/16 14:19, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> Some IRQ chips may be located in a power domain outside of the CPU
>> subsystem and hence will require device specific runtime power
>> management. In order to support such IRQ chips, add a pointer for a
>> device structure to the irq_chip structure, and if this pointer is
>> populated by the IRQ chip driver and CONFIG_PM is selected in the kernel
>> configuration, then the pm_runtime_get/put APIs for this chip will be
>> called when an IRQ is requested/freed, respectively.
>>
>> When entering system suspend and each interrupt is disabled if there is
>> no wake-up set for that interrupt. For an IRQ chip that utilises runtime
>> power management, print a warning message for each active interrupt that
>> has no wake-up set because these interrupts may be unnecessarily keeping
>> the IRQ chip enabled during system suspend.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/irq.h | 5 +++++
>> kernel/irq/chip.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> kernel/irq/internals.h | 1 +
>> kernel/irq/manage.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>> kernel/irq/pm.c | 3 +++
>> 5 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/irq.h b/include/linux/irq.h
>> index c4de62348ff2..82f36390048d 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/irq.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/irq.h
>> @@ -315,6 +315,7 @@ static inline irq_hw_number_t irqd_to_hwirq(struct irq_data *d)
>> /**
>> * struct irq_chip - hardware interrupt chip descriptor
>> *
>> + * @parent: pointer to associated device
>> * @name: name for /proc/interrupts
>> * @irq_startup: start up the interrupt (defaults to ->enable if NULL)
>> * @irq_shutdown: shut down the interrupt (defaults to ->disable if NULL)
>> @@ -354,6 +355,7 @@ static inline irq_hw_number_t irqd_to_hwirq(struct irq_data *d)
>> * @flags: chip specific flags
>> */
>> struct irq_chip {
>> + struct device *parent;
>
> Nit: Please don't call this just "parent". We have parent fields in
> irq_data and irq_domain structures, and they always are a pointer to the
> same type, indicating some form of stacking. Here, we're pointing to a
> different type altogether...
>
> How about calling it "dev", or "device" instead? It would make it much
> clearer that when crossing that pointer, we're in another subsystem
> altogether.
I will defer to Linus W here, as it was his request we make this
'parent' and not 'dev'. See ...
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145035839623442&w=2
> I'll come back to the rest of the patch a bit later, but I wanted to put
> that one out right away... ;-)
Thanks,
Jon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
