Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: intel: save HOSTSW_OWN register over suspend/resume

From: Chris Chiu <chiu@endlessm.com>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Drake <drake@endlessm.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	"open list:PIN CONTROL SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Upstreaming Team <linux@endlessm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: intel: save HOSTSW_OWN register over suspend/resume
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 16:38:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAB4CAwcQTH5BiDDbzfFXTDDuYQ_fuDd_1tKkecf6vwygGQmn5w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190328123444.GX3622@lahna.fi.intel.com>

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:34 PM Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 08:19:59PM +0800, Chris Chiu wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 5:38 PM Daniel Drake <drake@endlessm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 5:17 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > Hmm... Can you confirm that laptop you declared as a fixed case and the
> > > > mentioned here is the same one?
> > >
> > > They are definitely not the same exact unit - originally we had a
> > > pre-production sample, and now we briefly diagnosed a real production
> > > unit that was sold to a customer. There could be subtle motherboard
> > > variations as you mention.
> > >
> > > > If it's the case, I recommend to ping Asus again and make them check and fix.
> > >
> > > We'll keep an eye open for any opportunities to go deeper here.
> > > However further investigation on both our side and theirs is blocked
> > > by not having any of the affected hardware (since the models are now
> > > so old), so I'm not very optimistic that we'll be able to make
> > > progress there.
> > >
> > > > Meanwhile, Mika's proposal sounds feasible and not so intrusive. We may
> > > > implement this later on.
> > >
> > > Chris will work on implementing this for your consideration.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the quick feedback!
> > > Daniel
> >
> > What if I modify the patch as follows? It doesn't save HOSTSW_OWN register.
> > It just toggles the bit specifically for the IRQ GPIO pin after resume when DMI
> > matches.
>
> I don't really like having quirks like this if we can avoid it and in
> this case I think we can. Just always save HOSTSW_OWN and then restore
> it if there is a GPIO requested and the value differs (and log a warning
> or something like that).

You mean save the content of hostsw_own register on padgroup based ex.
    communities[i].hostown[gpp] = readl(base + gpp * 4);

And then check the hostown bit for the GPIO requested pin in
intel_pinctrl_resume(),
differs the hostsw_own bit on pin base (like padcfg), then restore the
hostsw_own
value of the padgroug which the GPIO pin is belonging to?

I think what you mean should be a much more straightforward solution
for this. Could
you implement this in your way and we can try to help verification. Thanks.

Chris