On Mon, 3 Sep 2012 22:59:06 -0700 "Shilimkar, Santosh" wrote: > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh > wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 3:53 PM, NeilBrown wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 09:47:50 +0530 "Shilimkar, Santosh" > >> wrote: > >> > >> > + Jon, > >> > > >> > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:14 PM, NeilBrown wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Current kernel will wake from suspend on an event on any active > >> > > GPIO even if enable_irq_wake() wasn't called. > >> > > > >> > > There are two reasons that the hardware wake-enable bit should be set: > >> > > > >> > > 1/ while non-suspended the CPU might go into a deep sleep (off_mode) > >> > > in which the wake-enable bit is needed for an interrupt to be > >> > > recognised. > >> > > 2/ while suspended the GPIO interrupt should wake from suspend if and > >> > > only if irq_wake as been enabled. > >> > > > >> > > The code currently doesn't keep these two reasons separate so they get > >> > > confused and sometimes the wakeup flags is set incorrectly. > >> > > > >> > > This patch reverts: > >> > > commit 9c4ed9e6c01e7a8bd9079da8267e1f03cb4761fc > >> > > gpio/omap: remove suspend/resume callbacks > >> > > and > >> > > commit 0aa2727399c0b78225021413022c164cb99fbc5e > >> > > gpio/omap: remove suspend_wakeup field from struct gpio_bank > >> > > > >> > > and makes some minor changes so that we have separate flags for "GPIO > >> > > should wake from deep idle" and "GPIO should wake from suspend". > >> > > > >> > > With this patch, the GPIO from my touch screen doesn't wake my device > >> > > any more, which is what I want. > >> > > > >> > > Cc: Kevin Hilman > >> > > Cc: Tony Lindgren > >> > > Cc: Santosh Shilimkar > >> > > Cc: Cousson, Benoit > >> > > Cc: Grant Likely > >> > > Cc: Tarun Kanti DebBarma > >> > > Cc: Felipe Balbi > >> > > Cc: Govindraj.R > >> > > > >> > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown > >> > > > >> > The patch doesn't seems to be correct. At least the 2/ gets > >> > fixed with a proper IRQCHIP flag. Can you try the patch at > >> > end of the email and see if it helps ? Am attaching it in case > >> > mailer damages it. > >> > > >> > Regards > >> > Santosh > >> > > >> > >From b8a38fc75e046f6462610e26c47c620cad850c24 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >> > From: Santosh Shilimkar > >> > Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 09:39:51 +0530 > >> > Subject: [PATCH] gpio: omap: Set IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND to mask all > >> > non-wakeup gpio wakeups. > >> > > >> > Set the irq chip flag IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND to cause the irq pm code > >> > to mask all non-wake gpios in suspend, which will ensure the wakeup > >> > enable > >> > bit is not set on non-wake gpios. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar > >> > --- > >> > drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | 1 + > >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >> > > >> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > >> > index e6efd77..50b4c18 100644 > >> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > >> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c > >> > @@ -779,6 +779,7 @@ static struct irq_chip gpio_irq_chip = { > >> > .irq_unmask = gpio_unmask_irq, > >> > .irq_set_type = gpio_irq_type, > >> > .irq_set_wake = gpio_wake_enable, > >> > + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; > >> > }; > >> > > >> > > >> > /*---------------------------------------------------------------------*/ > >> > >> > >> No obvious damage, unless the mailer is responsible or the ';' at the end > >> of > >> the line, rather than ',' :-) > >> > > :-) That was typo. > > > >> The approach makes sense, but does actually work. Should be fixable > >> though. > >> > >> When I try this I get: > >> > >> > >> > >> [ 158.114440] Checking wakeup interrupts > >> [ 158.118408] Unhandled fault: external abort on non-linefetch (0x1028) > >> at 0xfb054040 > >> [ 158.126403] Internal error: : 1028 [#1] PREEMPT ARM > >> [ 158.131500] Modules linked in: ipv6 g_ether hso libertas_sdio libertas > >> cfg80211 > >> [ 158.139190] CPU: 0 Not tainted (3.5.0-gta04-debug+ #2) > >> [ 158.144927] PC is at _set_gpio_triggering+0x38/0x258 > >> [ 158.150115] LR is at gpio_mask_irq+0xac/0xc0 > >> [ 158.154602] pc : [] lr : [] psr: 60000193 > >> [ 158.154602] sp : db521e90 ip : 00000011 fp : beeecc2c > >> [ 158.166595] r10: c05c8ebc r9 : daa5a858 r8 : 00000003 > >> [ 158.172027] r7 : a0000193 r6 : 00000000 r5 : fb054000 r4 : ded44e18 > >> [ 158.178863] r3 : 00000001 r2 : 00000000 r1 : ded30340 r0 : 00000040 > >> [ 158.185668] Flags: nZCv IRQs off FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM > >> Segment use > >> > >> so it looks like runtime PM has turned off the iclk to the GPIO module so > >> that > >> when we try to tell it to change settings, it is no longer listening to > >> us. > > From the crash logs it appears like that. > > > >> The "Checking wakeup interrupts" function happens very late in the suspend > >> cycle, after all the suspend_late and suspend_noirq functions have run. > >> Maybe it needs to be moved earlier... > >> > > No it shouldn't be moved and it is that point for lot many good > > reasons. Ofcourse > > this omap gpio driver crash needs to be addressed. Need to think bit > > more on this > > issue. > > > After thinking bit more on this, the problem seems to be coming > mainly because the gpio device is runtime suspended bit early than > it should be. Similar issue seen with i2c driver as well. The i2c issue > was discussed with Rafael at LPC last week. The idea is to move > the pm_runtime_enable/disable() calls entirely up to the > _late/_early stage of device suspend/resume. > Will update this thread once I have further update. This won't be late enough. IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND takes effect after all the _late callbacks have been called. I, too, spoke to Rafael about this in San Diego. He seemed to agree with me that the interrupt needs to be masked in the ->suspend callback. any later is too late. NeilBrown > > Regards > Santosh