linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V1 11/15] spmi: spmi-pmic-arb: enable the SPMI interrupt as a wakeup source

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 08 Jun 2017 17:00:33 +0530
From:   kgunda@...eaurora.org
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...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>,
        linux-arm-msm-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 11/15] spmi: spmi-pmic-arb: enable the SPMI interrupt
 as a wakeup source

On 2017-05-31 22:43, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> 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.
Yes. This looks cleaner. Will change it in the subsequent patch.