> What do you think about disabling the level/edge detection when > disable_irq_wake() is called instead? This seems more logical > and expected. Kevin, if we look at the current code, enable_irq_wake and disable_irq_wake Does not even touch any GPIO WAKEEN register, it seems it is intended To just log the gpio bit and enable its WAKEUP and IOPAD wakeup when suspend happens. And also, enable_irq_wake/disable_irq_wake Are designed to be able used when both IRQ is enabled AND disabled, In another words, enable_irq_wake may be called after irq_disable, Disable_irq_wake may be called after irq_enable, if we change Level/edge detect then it may cause either IRQ never happen After irq_enable, or IRQ staus bit also set after irq_disable. Since The root reason is the level/edge detect can cause IRQ status, it Is related with IRQ, not wakeup. What do you think? > > Kevin > > P.S., are you wanting to use your touchscreen as a wakeup source? > -- 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
