Re: [PATCH 16/17] pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag

[Sudeep Holla]

On 21/09/15 19:53, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > The IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag is used to identify the interrupts that should
> > be left enabled so as to allow them to work as expected during the
> > suspend-resume cycle, but doesn't guarantee that it will wake the system
> > from a suspended state, enable_irq_wake is recommended to be used for
> > the wakeup.
> >
> > This patch removes the use of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flags replacing it with
> > irq_set_irq_wake instead.
> >
> > Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 7 ++++---
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> > index ef04b962c3d5..a5d0f0e52de1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> > @@ -1615,12 +1615,14 @@ static void pcs_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
> >    */
> >   static int pcs_irq_set_wake(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int state)
> >   {
> > +	struct pcs_soc_data *pcs_soc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > +
> >   	if (state)
> >   		pcs_irq_unmask(d);
> >   	else
> >   		pcs_irq_mask(d);
> >
> > -	return 0;
> > +	return irq_set_irq_wake(pcs_soc->irq, state);
>
> That's going to create at least a lockdep splat due to nesting
> irq_desc->lock.

Ah right, I noted that I must fix it when you pointed out similar issue
on the other thread[1]. I forgot later, sorry will look into that.

Regards,
Sudeep

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/8/617
--
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/