Re: [PATCH] gpio: omap-gpio: add support for pm_runtime autosuspend

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



+ Jon,

On Friday 26 October 2012 06:49 PM, Tim Niemeyer wrote:
Adds support for configuring the omap-gpio driver use autosuspend for
runtime power management. This can reduce the latency in using it by
not suspending the device immediately on idle. If another access takes
place before the autosuspend timeout (2 secs), the call to resume the
device can return immediately saving some save/ restore cycles.

This removes also the bank->mod_usage counter, because this is already
handled in pm_runtime.

I use a gpio to monitor a spi transfer which occurs every 250µs. The
suspend overhead is to high, so almost every second transfer is lost.
This patch fixes that.

Signed-off-by: Tim Niemeyer <tim.niemeyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c |   81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
  1 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)

From patch it appears your main motive is to delay the idle kicking in
with a timeout to avoid GPIO on cpuidle path. Some comments

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
index 94cbc84..708d5a9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
  #include <asm/mach/irq.h>

  #define OFF_MODE	1
+#define GPIO_AUTOSUSPEND_TIMEOUT                2000

  static LIST_HEAD(omap_gpio_list);

@@ -64,7 +65,6 @@ struct gpio_bank {
  	spinlock_t lock;
  	struct gpio_chip chip;
  	struct clk *dbck;
-	u32 mod_usage;
How have you tested 'mod_suage' change ?

  	u32 dbck_enable_mask;
  	bool dbck_enabled;
  	struct device *dev;
@@ -557,10 +557,9 @@ static int omap_gpio_request(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)

  	/*
  	 * If this is the first gpio_request for the bank,
-	 * enable the bank module.
+	 * resume the bank module.
Since you removing bank notion, "If this is the first gpio_request
for the bank," becomes irrelevant from code perspective.

[..]

@@ -608,28 +594,15 @@ static void omap_gpio_free(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
  			__raw_readl(bank->base + bank->regs->wkup_en);
  	}

-	bank->mod_usage &= ~(1 << offset);
-
-	if (bank->regs->ctrl && !bank->mod_usage) {
-		void __iomem *reg = bank->base + bank->regs->ctrl;
-		u32 ctrl;
-
-		ctrl = __raw_readl(reg);
-		/* Module is disabled, clocks are gated */
-		ctrl |= GPIO_MOD_CTRL_BIT;
-		__raw_writel(ctrl, reg);
-		bank->context.ctrl = ctrl;
-	}
-
  	_reset_gpio(bank, bank->chip.base + offset);
  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);

  	/*
  	 * If this is the last gpio to be freed in the bank,
-	 * disable the bank module.
+	 * put the bank module into suspend.
  	 */
-	if (!bank->mod_usage)
-		pm_runtime_put(bank->dev);
+	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(bank->dev);
+	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(bank->dev);
Waiting for 2 seconds timeout even on GPIO free
seems to be wrong.

  }

  /*
@@ -715,7 +688,8 @@ static void gpio_irq_handler(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc)
  exit:
  	if (!unmasked)
  		chained_irq_exit(chip, desc);
-	pm_runtime_put(bank->dev);
+	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(bank->dev);
+	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(bank->dev);
This is what is the main change from this patch which helps your
case.
  }

  static void gpio_irq_shutdown(struct irq_data *d)
@@ -1132,6 +1106,8 @@ static int __devinit omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)

  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, bank);

+	pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(bank->dev);
+	pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(bank->dev, GPIO_AUTOSUSPEND_TIMEOUT);

Can you please report how have you tested this change ? What other PM
tests you have done?

Removing mod usage might just break this driver because now individual
banks which can idle before, can no longer idle.

Just to expand a bit, Out of 6 GPIO banks, GPIO1 bank is in always ON
domain where as remaing 5 are in peripheral domain. Letting individual
banks idle allowed you let the clock domain idle than keeping all the
6 banks and hence respective clock/power domain in ON state.

So the adding timeout might be reasonable but I am not sure about
the mod_usage change here.

Jon, What you say ?



--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux