[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170531171358.GC20170@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 10:13:58 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Kiran Gunda <kgunda@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...eaurora.org>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>,
Subbaraman Narayanamurthy <subbaram@...eaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
adharmap@...cinc.com, aghayal@....qualcomm.com,
Nicholas Troast <ntroast@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 11/15] spmi: spmi-pmic-arb: enable the SPMI interrupt
as a wakeup source
On 05/30, Kiran Gunda wrote:
> Currently the SPMI interrupt will not wake the device. Enable this
> interrupt as a wakeup source.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Troast <ntroast@...eaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Kiran Gunda <kgunda@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
> index 0deac33..2afe359 100644
> --- a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
> +++ b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
> @@ -1140,6 +1140,7 @@ static int spmi_pmic_arb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
>
> irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(pa->irq, pmic_arb_chained_irq, pa);
> + enable_irq_wake(pa->irq);
Why don't we do this through an irq_set_wake callback in the
irqchip? That way, we don't mark this irq as wakeup if any child
irqs aren't marked as wakeup.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists