Hi, On Sat, 2011-08-27 at 21:42 +0200, Alan Stern wrote: > On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, Santosh wrote: > > > On Saturday 27 August 2011 07:31 PM, Alan Stern wrote: > > > On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, Santosh wrote: > > > > > >> I might be wrong here, but after discussion with Govindraj on this > > >> issue, it seems there is a flaw in the way OMAP chain handler > > >> handling the child interrupts. > > >> > > >> On OMAP, we have special interrupt wakeup source at PRCM level and > > >> many devices can trigger wakeup from low power via this common > > >> interrupt source. The common interrupt source upon wakeup from low > > >> power state, decodes the source of interrupt and based on that > > >> source, calls the respective device ISR directly. > > >> > > >> The issue I see here is, the ISR on _a_ device (UART in this case) > > >> is happening even before UART resume and DPM resume has been completed. > > >> If this is the case, then it is surely asking for trouble. Because not > > >> just clocks, but even driver state machine is already in suspend state > > >> when the ISR is called. > > > > > > If the driver state machine is in the suspend state when the ISR is > > > called, then the ISR should realize it is handling a wakeup event > > > instead of a normal I/O event. All it needs to do is turn off the > > > interrupt source; the event itself will be taken care of during the > > > device's resume callback. > > > > > Good point but the ISR is called as a function call and not real > > hardware event so no need to turn-off the source in the child > > ISR. Parent ISR will clear the source anyways. > > > > But the intention here is to record the event for the child. > > In that case the ISR only has to record the event. > > > I mean for UART wakeup, the received character should be > > extracted. If not done, UART will loose that character because > > the event is lost. So not sure how the event will be taken > > care during resume callback. Could you elaborate bit more on > > last comment please? > > The resume callback routine must check to see if an event was recorded. > If one was, the routine must see whether a character was received while > the system was asleep and extract the character from the UART. (It > probably won't hurt to do this even if an event wasn't recorded.) > > Alan Stern > After thinking about this problem and looking at possible ways to fix it, I am planning to change the PRCM chain handler to be a driver, which gets suspended along with the rest of the system. This means the PRCM interrupt would get disabled also during this time, and it would be enabled in the driver->complete() call, which should happen after rest of the drivers have been able to enable their PM runtime in the driver->resume() call chain. Do you see any problems with this approach? The only issue I am seeing myself is if some driver decides to do resume() in the complete() pm-op and potentially screwing the ordering here... -Tero Texas Instruments Oy, Tekniikantie 12, 02150 Espoo. Y-tunnus: 0115040-6. Kotipaikka: Helsinki _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
