[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140428121120.GB21279@lee--X1>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 13:11:20 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
Sangbeom Kim <sbkim73@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: sec-core: Fix IRQ handling after resume if this
is not a wakeup source
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> During suspend the IRQ should be disabled even if this is not a wakeup
> source. This is a proper way of fixing the IRQ handling issue during
> resume (IRQ handler fails because I2C bus did not resume yet).
>
> When device is suspended and sec-core interrupt is signaled the irq chip
> will try to handle it regardless of wakeup source. Device could be woken
> up by different IRQ but still the IRQ handler will try to read the
> registers over I2C bus and fail because I2C bus won't be ready yet.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
> ---
> drivers/mfd/sec-core.c | 28 +++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
It's pretty worrying that these two patches are so alike and they
actually change different files. Is there any way we can unify more of
the code?
Patch applied, thanks.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists