From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastian Hecht Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:48:33 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: st1232: Add IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Message-Id: List-Id: References: <1360863132-11227-1-git-send-email-hechtb+renesas@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Magnus Damm Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Tony SIM Hi Magnus, 2013/2/14 Magnus Damm : > Hi Bastian, > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Bastian Hecht wrote: >> When registering the interrupt handler we add the IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag >> to save the IRQ line from being disabled during suspension. This way we >> keep the ability to use the device as a wakeup source. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bastian Hecht >> --- >> drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c >> index d9d05e2..4f37199 100644 >> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c >> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c >> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static int st1232_ts_probe(struct i2c_client *client, >> input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_MT_POSITION_Y, MIN_Y, MAX_Y, 0, 0); >> >> error = request_threaded_irq(client->irq, NULL, st1232_ts_irq_handler, >> - IRQF_ONESHOT, client->name, ts); >> + IRQF_ONESHOT | IRQF_NO_SUSPEND, client->name, ts); > > Are you sure this is the correct way to handle this? Which platform > have you tested this on? How about other boards? > > Usually wake up handling is dealt with separately from interrupts. > Looks like something is missing in your interrupt controller code. I've got 2 different patterns happening on the KZM9G and the Armadillo800EVA. Armadillo: I provoke a fail by using the touchscreen while suspending that triggers the first "intc disable 10 10" (see below). The suspend code disables all(?) IRQ lines and after "PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 4901.016 msecs" the wakeup sources get reenabled. In fact I'm unsure if the IRQ line 10 gets reenabled by the generic IRQ handling code when reenabling the line after handling it or if it is done by code that sets up the wakeup sources. IRQ 14 is a GPIO button that is marked as a wakeup source in the board code: GPIO_KEY(KEY_POWER, GPIO_PORT99, "SW3", .wakeup = 1), Now the strange thing here is that even after enabling IRQ line 10 ("intc write8: addr e0804064, h 2034a25, data 20" is the correct write to unmask it) the touchscreen stays dead and I can't wake using it. Even if I wake it using the GPIO key the st1232 stays dead and I don't get any more interrupts from it. When I suspend while not using the touchscreen I get the same sequence without the inital "intc disable 10 10" and no i2c timeout happens and I am able to wake from the st1232. Here my log: PM: Syncing filesystems ... done. Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.02 seconds) done. Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.02 seconds) done. intc disable 10 10 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a25, data 20 PM: suspend of devices complete after 243.854 msecs PM: late suspend of devices complete after 0.327 msecs intc disable 10 10 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a25, data 20 intc disable 12 12 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a23, data 8 intc disable 13 13 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a22, data 4 intc disable 14 14 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a21, data 2 intc disable 15 15 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a20, data 1 intc disable 44 44 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a24, data 10 intc disable 45 45 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a25, data 20 intc disable 46 46 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a26, data 40 intc disable 47 47 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a27, data 80 intc disable 168 168 intc write8: addr e6950090, h 20214a27, data 80 intc disable 178 178 intc write8: addr e6950094, h 22234a25, data 20 intc disable 444 444 intc write8: addr e0806190, h 6074a20, data 1 intc disable 512 512 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a24, data 10 intc disable 513 513 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a25, data 20 intc disable 514 514 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a26, data 40 intc disable 515 515 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a27, data 80 intc disable 588 588 intc write8: addr e0808190, h 10114a23, data 8 i2c-sh_mobile i2c-sh_mobile.0: Transfer request timed out i2c-sh_mobile i2c-sh_mobile.0: Polling timed out PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 4977.712 msecs intc enable 10 10 intc write8: addr e0804064, h 2034a25, data 20 intc enable 14 14 intc write8: addr e0804064, h 2034a21, data 2 KZM9G: Here even if I don't produce IRQs from the st1232 I can't wake without the patch. The IRQ gets disabled as in the log above but there is no reenabling at all. So my patch stops disabling the IRQ line in the first place and we are able to use it as a wakeup source. # echo mem >/sys/power/state PM: Syncing filesystems ... done. PM: Preparing system for mem sleep Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.02 seconds) done. Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.01 seconds) done. PM: Entering mem sleep PM: suspend of devices complete after 3.417 msecs PM: late suspend of devices complete after 0.244 msecs intc disable 568 568 intc write8: addr df00a044, h 2034a27, data 80 intc disable 444 444 intc write8: addr df004190, h 6074a20, data 1 intc disable 947 947 intc write8: addr df00a048, h 4054a24, data 10 intc disable 954 954 intc write8: addr df00a04c, h 6074a25, data 20 PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 25.146 msecs Disabling non-boot CPUs ... CPU1: shutdown No wakeup possible here. Btw there is 1 more thing that confuses me: The touchscreen IRQ line is 424 in /proc/interrupts: 424: 34 0 INTCA-GIC-level st1232-ts but when using it I get intc disable 568 568 intc write8: addr df00a044, h 2034a27, data 80 intc enable 568 568 intc write8: addr df00a064, h 2034a27, data 80 But IRQ line 568 doesn't exist at all in /proc/interrupts. Can you explain that? So you are probably right, there is something phony in the interrupt controller code. And probably in 2 different spots. Thanks, Bastian > Thanks, > > / magnus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastian Hecht Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: st1232: Add IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 09:48:33 -0600 Message-ID: References: <1360863132-11227-1-git-send-email-hechtb+renesas@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Magnus Damm Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Tony SIM List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Hi Magnus, 2013/2/14 Magnus Damm : > Hi Bastian, > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Bastian Hecht wrote: >> When registering the interrupt handler we add the IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag >> to save the IRQ line from being disabled during suspension. This way we >> keep the ability to use the device as a wakeup source. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bastian Hecht >> --- >> drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c >> index d9d05e2..4f37199 100644 >> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c >> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/st1232.c >> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static int st1232_ts_probe(struct i2c_client *client, >> input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_MT_POSITION_Y, MIN_Y, MAX_Y, 0, 0); >> >> error = request_threaded_irq(client->irq, NULL, st1232_ts_irq_handler, >> - IRQF_ONESHOT, client->name, ts); >> + IRQF_ONESHOT | IRQF_NO_SUSPEND, client->name, ts); > > Are you sure this is the correct way to handle this? Which platform > have you tested this on? How about other boards? > > Usually wake up handling is dealt with separately from interrupts. > Looks like something is missing in your interrupt controller code. I've got 2 different patterns happening on the KZM9G and the Armadillo800EVA. Armadillo: I provoke a fail by using the touchscreen while suspending that triggers the first "intc disable 10 10" (see below). The suspend code disables all(?) IRQ lines and after "PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 4901.016 msecs" the wakeup sources get reenabled. In fact I'm unsure if the IRQ line 10 gets reenabled by the generic IRQ handling code when reenabling the line after handling it or if it is done by code that sets up the wakeup sources. IRQ 14 is a GPIO button that is marked as a wakeup source in the board code: GPIO_KEY(KEY_POWER, GPIO_PORT99, "SW3", .wakeup = 1), Now the strange thing here is that even after enabling IRQ line 10 ("intc write8: addr e0804064, h 2034a25, data 20" is the correct write to unmask it) the touchscreen stays dead and I can't wake using it. Even if I wake it using the GPIO key the st1232 stays dead and I don't get any more interrupts from it. When I suspend while not using the touchscreen I get the same sequence without the inital "intc disable 10 10" and no i2c timeout happens and I am able to wake from the st1232. Here my log: PM: Syncing filesystems ... done. Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.02 seconds) done. Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.02 seconds) done. intc disable 10 10 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a25, data 20 PM: suspend of devices complete after 243.854 msecs PM: late suspend of devices complete after 0.327 msecs intc disable 10 10 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a25, data 20 intc disable 12 12 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a23, data 8 intc disable 13 13 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a22, data 4 intc disable 14 14 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a21, data 2 intc disable 15 15 intc write8: addr e0804044, h 2034a20, data 1 intc disable 44 44 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a24, data 10 intc disable 45 45 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a25, data 20 intc disable 46 46 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a26, data 40 intc disable 47 47 intc write8: addr e69400ac, h 16174a27, data 80 intc disable 168 168 intc write8: addr e6950090, h 20214a27, data 80 intc disable 178 178 intc write8: addr e6950094, h 22234a25, data 20 intc disable 444 444 intc write8: addr e0806190, h 6074a20, data 1 intc disable 512 512 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a24, data 10 intc disable 513 513 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a25, data 20 intc disable 514 514 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a26, data 40 intc disable 515 515 intc write8: addr e08061ac, h e0f4a27, data 80 intc disable 588 588 intc write8: addr e0808190, h 10114a23, data 8 i2c-sh_mobile i2c-sh_mobile.0: Transfer request timed out i2c-sh_mobile i2c-sh_mobile.0: Polling timed out PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 4977.712 msecs intc enable 10 10 intc write8: addr e0804064, h 2034a25, data 20 intc enable 14 14 intc write8: addr e0804064, h 2034a21, data 2 KZM9G: Here even if I don't produce IRQs from the st1232 I can't wake without the patch. The IRQ gets disabled as in the log above but there is no reenabling at all. So my patch stops disabling the IRQ line in the first place and we are able to use it as a wakeup source. # echo mem >/sys/power/state PM: Syncing filesystems ... done. PM: Preparing system for mem sleep Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.02 seconds) done. Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.01 seconds) done. PM: Entering mem sleep PM: suspend of devices complete after 3.417 msecs PM: late suspend of devices complete after 0.244 msecs intc disable 568 568 intc write8: addr df00a044, h 2034a27, data 80 intc disable 444 444 intc write8: addr df004190, h 6074a20, data 1 intc disable 947 947 intc write8: addr df00a048, h 4054a24, data 10 intc disable 954 954 intc write8: addr df00a04c, h 6074a25, data 20 PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 25.146 msecs Disabling non-boot CPUs ... CPU1: shutdown No wakeup possible here. Btw there is 1 more thing that confuses me: The touchscreen IRQ line is 424 in /proc/interrupts: 424: 34 0 INTCA-GIC-level st1232-ts but when using it I get intc disable 568 568 intc write8: addr df00a044, h 2034a27, data 80 intc enable 568 568 intc write8: addr df00a064, h 2034a27, data 80 But IRQ line 568 doesn't exist at all in /proc/interrupts. Can you explain that? So you are probably right, there is something phony in the interrupt controller code. And probably in 2 different spots. Thanks, Bastian > Thanks, > > / magnus