[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1617933211.12105.22.camel@mhfsdcap03>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2021 09:53:31 +0800
From: Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
CC: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"open list:ULTRA-WIDEBAND (UWB) SUBSYSTEM:"
<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC..."
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Tianping Fang <tianping.fang@...iatek.com>,
Eddie Hung <eddie.hung@...iatek.com>,
"Ikjoon Jang" <ikjn@...omium.org>,
Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] PM: runtime: enable wake irq after runtime_suspend
hook called
On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 19:41 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 11:35 AM Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com> wrote:
> >
> > When the dedicated wake irq is level trigger, enable it before
> > calling runtime_suspend, will trigger an interrupt.
> >
> > e.g.
> > for a low level trigger type, it's low level at running time (0),
> > and becomes high level when enters suspend (runtime_suspend (1) is
> > called), a wakeup signal at (2) make it become low level, wake irq
> > will be triggered.
> >
> > ------------------
> > | ^ ^|
> > ---------------- | | --------------
> > |<---(0)--->|<--(1)--| (3) (2) (4)
> >
> > if we enable the wake irq before calling runtime_suspend during (0),
> > an interrupt will arise, it causes resume immediately;
>
> But that's necessary to avoid missing a wakeup interrupt, isn't it?
That's also what I worry about.
It may happen if the trigger level only keeps a very short time, and the
interrupt controller can't process it timely, but I don't think it
follow the level trigger mechanism, the HW should latch it until the ISR
is called. right?
>
> > enable wake irq after calling runtime_suspend, e.g. at (3) or (4),
> > will works.
> >
> > This patch seems no side effect on edge trigger wake irq.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/base/power/runtime.c | 5 ++---
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> > index a46a7e30881b..796739a015a5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> > @@ -619,12 +619,12 @@ static int rpm_suspend(struct device *dev, int rpmflags)
> > __update_runtime_status(dev, RPM_SUSPENDING);
> >
> > callback = RPM_GET_CALLBACK(dev, runtime_suspend);
> > -
> > - dev_pm_enable_wake_irq_check(dev, true);
> > retval = rpm_callback(callback, dev);
> > if (retval)
> > goto fail;
> >
> > + dev_pm_enable_wake_irq_check(dev, true);
> > +
> > no_callback:
> > __update_runtime_status(dev, RPM_SUSPENDED);
> > pm_runtime_deactivate_timer(dev);
> > @@ -659,7 +659,6 @@ static int rpm_suspend(struct device *dev, int rpmflags)
> > return retval;
> >
> > fail:
> > - dev_pm_disable_wake_irq_check(dev);
> > __update_runtime_status(dev, RPM_ACTIVE);
> > dev->power.deferred_resume = false;
> > wake_up_all(&dev->power.wait_queue);
> > --
> > 2.18.0
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists