RE: [PATCH 1/1] irqchip: imx-gpcv2: Simplify the implemenation

[Shenwei Wang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sudeep Holla [mailto:sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 2015年8月26日 11:13
> To: Wang Shenwei-B38339; jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: shawn.guo@xxxxxxxxxx; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Sudeep Holla;
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Huang
> Yongcai-B20788
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] irqchip: imx-gpcv2: Simplify the implemenation
> 
> typo in $subject

Just noticed. Will change it.

> On 26/08/15 16:49, Shenwei Wang wrote:
> > Based on Sudeep Holla's review comments, the implementation can be
> > simplified by using the two flags: IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE and
> > IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND. This patch enables the flags in the struct
> > irq_chip and removes the unnecessory syscore_ops callbacks.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c | 83 +++++++----------------------------------
> >   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c index 4a97afa..e25df78 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> > @@ -22,7 +22,6 @@ struct gpcv2_irqchip_data {
> >   	struct raw_spinlock    rlock;
> >   	void __iomem       *gpc_base;
> >   	u32 wakeup_sources[IMR_NUM];
> > -	u32 saved_irq_mask[IMR_NUM];
> >   	u32 cpu2wakeup;
> >   };
> >
> > @@ -30,79 +29,25 @@ static struct gpcv2_irqchip_data
> > *imx_gpcv2_instance;
> >
> >   u32 imx_gpcv2_get_wakeup_source(u32 **sources)
> 
> I assume this patch is against -next and I don't see any users of
> imx_gpcv2_get_wakeup_source in -next.
> 
> If possible I would avoid exposing this function by implementing suspend_ops just
> as before(just saving raw h/w reg values and restoring then back on resume w/o
> tagging them as wakeup mask though they might be indeed wakeup mask).
> 
> In that way, this driver is self-contained and whatever imx code calls this function
> will not have dependency on this driver, no ? Do you need access to
> imx_gpcv2_get_wakeup_source too early in resume much before suspend_ops
> resume ? I would like to see the user of that function to comment on that any
> further.

It is linux-next. The user is in the following patch which is under review.
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-July/361388.html

The access to this function will only happen in suspend_ops so far.

Regards,
Shenwei


> Regards,
> Sudeep