On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:10:06AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> writes:
>
> > OMAP I2C driver will re-enable IRQs right after
> > masking them during suspend.
> >
> > That's not what we want. We want to keep IRQs
> > masked until our resume method is called.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 10 ++--------
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> > index db31eae..7eeae11 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> > @@ -1247,14 +1247,8 @@ static int omap_i2c_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
> >
> > omap_i2c_write_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_IE_REG, 0);
> >
> > - if (_dev->rev < OMAP_I2C_OMAP1_REV_2) {
> > - iv = omap_i2c_read_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_IV_REG); /* Read clears */
> > - } else {
> > - omap_i2c_write_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_STAT_REG, _dev->iestate);
> > -
> > - /* Flush posted write */
> > - omap_i2c_read_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_STAT_REG);
> > - }
>
> Are you sure this re-enables the interrupt? It looks to me like
> it's meant to clear the interrupt.
>
> > + /* Flush posted write */
> > + omap_i2c_read_reg(_dev, OMAP_I2C_STAT_REG);
>
> Assuming the above is correct, should this be IE_REG?
indeed. My eyes failed. This patch can be thrown away. My bad.
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
