[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <566170D5.2070309@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 10:54:13 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND
flag
Hi Grygorii,
On 04/12/15 10:44, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 11:37 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
[...]
>> And these both need to be applied together when we have a fix for the
>> above
>> as otherwise we'll get the lock recursion Sudeep mentioned in patch 2/2.
>>
>
> Most probably below diff will fix above issue:
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> index 3fc2cbe..69cde67 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> @@ -338,6 +338,7 @@ int omap_prcm_register_chain_handler(struct
> omap_prcm_irq_setup *irq_setup)
> ct->chip.irq_ack = irq_gc_ack_set_bit;
> ct->chip.irq_mask = irq_gc_mask_clr_bit;
> ct->chip.irq_unmask = irq_gc_mask_set_bit;
> + ct->chip.flags = IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE;
Thanks for testing. In that case without this hunk, we should get error
from pcs_irq_set_wake in the suspend path. No ? May be driver is not
checking the error value and entering suspend.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
--
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