Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag

[Sudeep Holla]

Hi Grygorii,

On 04/12/15 10:44, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 11:37 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:

[...]

> > And these both need to be applied together when we have a fix for the
> > above
> > as otherwise we'll get the lock recursion Sudeep mentioned in patch 2/2.
>
> Most probably below diff will fix above issue:
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> index 3fc2cbe..69cde67 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c
> @@ -338,6 +338,7 @@ int omap_prcm_register_chain_handler(struct
> omap_prcm_irq_setup *irq_setup)
>                  ct->chip.irq_ack = irq_gc_ack_set_bit;
>                  ct->chip.irq_mask = irq_gc_mask_clr_bit;
>                  ct->chip.irq_unmask = irq_gc_mask_set_bit;
> +               ct->chip.flags = IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE;

Thanks for testing. In that case without this hunk, we should get error
from pcs_irq_set_wake in the suspend path. No ? May be driver is not
checking the error value and entering suspend.

--
Regards,
Sudeep
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/