On 06/28/2012 06:10 PM, Franky Lin wrote:
> On 06/28/2012 03:59 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>
>> On 06/28/2012 05:53 PM, Franky Lin wrote:
>>> I found one interesting thing. When I added the print info to see when
>>> runtime_suspend/resume get called, it seems like the suspend/resume is
>>> unbalance during boot. Resume got called more than suspend. So I hack
>>> the code to make sure suspend and resume are called in pair. A resume
>>> without suspend will do nothing and return immediately. This also makes
>>> the hang vanish.
>>
>> I am not 100% sure I follow. On boot I would expect to see a
>> resume/suspend due to the probe on the irq bank and then I would expect
>> to see another resume from the acquisition of the gpio, however, I would
>> not expect a suspend until the gpio is freed, which I don't believe you
>> are doing.
>>
>> Can you share your hack? Just paste the diff? This may help me
>> understand more.
>>
>
> OK.
> This is what I saw in the log:
> [ 0.171844] dummy:
> [ 0.172912] NET: Registered protocol family 16
> [ 0.173431] GPMC revision 6.0
> [ 0.173492] gpmc: irq-52 could not claim: err -22
> [ 0.177551] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.178619] OMAP GPIO hardware version 0.1
> [ 0.178649] !!!!!omap_gpio_runtime_suspend
> [ 0.178771] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.179351] !!!!!omap_gpio_runtime_suspend
> [ 0.179504] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.180023] !!!!!omap_gpio_runtime_suspend
> [ 0.180145] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.180694] !!!!!omap_gpio_runtime_suspend
> [ 0.180847] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.181365] !!!!!omap_gpio_runtime_suspend
> [ 0.181518] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.182037] !!!!!omap_gpio_runtime_suspend
> [ 0.185089] omap_mux_init: Add partition: #1: core, flags: 2
> [ 0.186462] omap_mux_init: Add partition: #2: wkup, flags: 2
> [ 0.186584] error setting wl12xx data: -38
> [ 0.189788] _omap_mux_get_by_name: Could not find signal
> uart1_rx.uart1_rx
> [ 0.189788] _omap_mux_get_by_name: Could not find signal
> uart1_rx.uart1_rx
> [ 0.239501] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.239532] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
> [ 0.241058] usbhs_omap: alias fck already exists
> [ 0.244781] ??????omap_gpio_runtime_resume
Sorry, can you do one more test? :-)
Add the following and send me the output?
Thanks!
Jon
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
index c4ed172..3aa0f96 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
@@ -1155,6 +1155,7 @@ static int omap_gpio_runtime_suspend(struct device
*dev)
unsigned long flags;
u32 wake_low, wake_hi;
+ pr_info("%s: bank @ 0x%x\n", __func__, (u32)bank->base);
spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags);
/*
@@ -1221,6 +1222,7 @@ static int omap_gpio_runtime_resume(struct device
*dev)
u32 l = 0, gen, gen0, gen1;
unsigned long flags;
+ pr_info("%s: bank @ 0x%x\n", __func__, (u32)bank->base);
spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags);
_gpio_dbck_enable(bank);
@@ -1239,6 +1241,7 @@ static int omap_gpio_runtime_resume(struct device
*dev)
context_lost_cnt_after =
bank->get_context_loss_count(bank->dev);
if (context_lost_cnt_after != bank->context_loss_count) {
+ pr_info("%s: count %d, now %d", __func__,
bank->context_loss_count, context_lost_cnt_after);
omap_gpio_restore_context(bank);
} else {
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);
@@ -1341,6 +1344,7 @@ void omap2_gpio_resume_after_idle(void)
#if defined(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME)
static void omap_gpio_restore_context(struct gpio_bank *bank)
{
+ pr_info("%s: bank @ 0x%x\n", __func__, (u32)bank->base);
__raw_writel(bank->context.wake_en,
bank->base + bank->regs->wkup_en);
__raw_writel(bank->context.ctrl, bank->base + bank->regs->ctrl);
--
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
