From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 3/3] input: i8042: Avoid resetting controller on system suspend/resume Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 15:34:42 -0700 Message-ID: <20151006223442.GA31850@dtor-ws> References: <10641052.oOBhM6BU9G@vostro.rjw.lan> <5472042.4c1h9diL7E@vostro.rjw.lan> <2723857.EVg1dAvTli@vostro.rjw.lan> <3385784.1Q539YNd1G@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f50.google.com ([209.85.220.50]:35743 "EHLO mail-pa0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753156AbbJFWeq (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:34:46 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3385784.1Q539YNd1G@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , Alan Stern , Daniel Vetter , Bjorn Helgaas , Linux PCI On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 12:53:49AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > 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 > --- > 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 > #include > #include > +#include > > #include > > @@ -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? Thanks. -- Dmitry