[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <159730326694.33733.15791110829493100948@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 00:21:06 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
evgreen@...omium.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org, maz@...nel.org,
mka@...omium.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, agross@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
jason@...edaemon.net, dianders@...omium.org, rnayak@...eaurora.org,
ilina@...eaurora.org, lsrao@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] pinctrl: qcom: Use return value from irq_set_wake call
Quoting Maulik Shah (2020-08-13 00:17:18)
> Hi,
>
> On 8/12/2020 1:04 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Maulik Shah (2020-08-10 04:20:55)
> >> msmgpio irqchip is not using return value of irq_set_wake call.
> >> Start using it.
> > Does this work when the irq parent isn't setup in a hierarchy?
> yes it works fine even when parent isn't setup in hierarchy.
> > I seem to
> > recall that this was written this way because sometimes
> > irq_set_irq_wake() would fail for the summary irq so it was a best
> > effort setting of wake on the summary line.
> Thanks for pointing this.
>
> It was written this way since previously GIC driver neither had
> IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE flag nor it implemented .irq_set_wake callback,
>
> so the call to irq_set_irq_wake() to set_irq_wake_real() used to return
> error -ENXIO in past.
>
> I see this is already taken care now in GIC drivers by adding
> IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE flag.
Ok, great. Thanks for double checking.
Can you add those details to the commit message so we don't forget? And
then I'm happy to see:
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists