From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 3/3] input: i8042: Avoid resetting controller on system suspend/resume
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 01:08:30 +0200
Message-ID: <1927174.T9TA7zgbS1@vostro.rjw.lan>
References: <10641052.oOBhM6BU9G@vostro.rjw.lan> <3385784.1Q539YNd1G@vostro.rjw.lan> <20151006223442.GA31850@dtor-ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20151006223442.GA31850@dtor-ws>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org

On Tuesday, October 06, 2015 03:34:42 PM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 12:53:49AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > 
> > If the upcoming system suspend is not going to be handled by the
> > platform firmware, like in the suspend-to-idle case, it is not
> > necessary to reset the controller in i8042_pm_suspend(), so avoid
> > doing that.
> > 
> > Moreover, if the system resume currently in progress has not been
> > started by the platform firmware, like in the suspend-to-idle case,
> > i8042_controller_resume() need not be called by i8042_pm_resume(),
> > so avoid doing that too in that case.
> > 
> > Additionally, try to catch the event that woke up the system by
> > calling the interrupt handler early during system resume if it has
> > not been started by the platform firmware.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/input/serio/i8042.c |   15 +++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
> > @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> >  #include <linux/i8042.h>
> >  #include <linux/slab.h>
> > +#include <linux/suspend.h>
> >  
> >  #include <asm/io.h>
> >  
> > @@ -1170,7 +1171,8 @@ static int i8042_pm_suspend(struct devic
> >  {
> >  	int i;
> >  
> > -	i8042_controller_reset(true);
> > +	if (pm_suspend_via_firmware())
> > +		i8042_controller_reset(true);
> >  
> >  	/* Set up serio interrupts for system wakeup. */
> >  	for (i = 0; i < I8042_NUM_PORTS; i++) {
> > @@ -1183,6 +1185,14 @@ static int i8042_pm_suspend(struct devic
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static int i8042_pm_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
> > +{
> > +	if (!pm_resume_via_firmware())
> > +		i8042_interrupt(0, NULL);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int i8042_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
> >  {
> >  	int i;
> > @@ -1199,7 +1209,7 @@ static int i8042_pm_resume(struct device
> >  	 * to bring it in a sane state. (In case of S2D we expect
> >  	 * BIOS to reset the controller for us.)
> >  	 */
> > -	return i8042_controller_resume(true);
> > +	return pm_resume_via_firmware() ? i8042_controller_resume(true) : 0;
> 
> What happens if we were going to suspend via firmware so we reset the
> controller but then we got wakeup condition and we actually did not
> suspend. What pm_resume_via_firmware() will return in this case?

It will return 'false'.  Do we need to resume the controller then?  But I guess
'false' should be passed to i8042_controller_resume() in that case?

Rafael