Re: [PATCH/RFC] gpio: rcar: Add Runtime PM handling for interrupts
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date: 2016-02-18 15:12:23
Also in:
linux-pm
Hi Jon, On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Jon Hunter [off-list ref] wrote:
On 09/02/16 15:19, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:quoted
The R-Car GPIO driver handles Runtime PM for requested GPIOs only. When using a GPIO purely as an interrupt source, no Runtime PM handling is done, and the GPIO module's clock may not be enabled. To fix this: - Add .irq_request_resources() and .irq_release_resources() callbacks to handle Runtime PM when an interrupt is requested,I know that when I was looking at runtime-pm support for IRQ chips (which I have been meaning to get back too), the problem with irq_request_resources() is that it is called from the context of a spinlock (in __setup_irq()). You mentioned that you have not seen any reports of might_sleep_if(), but have you ensured that it is actually runtime resuming in your testing and you are not getting lucky?
It must be runtime-resuming, because without the call to pm_runtime_get_sync() interrupts don't work.
An alternative for you might be to use the
irq_bus_lock/irq_bus_sync_unlock callbacks. See what Grygorii
implemented for OMAP in commit aca82d1cbb49 ("gpio: omap: move pm
runtime in irq_chip.irq_bus_lock/sync_unlock").Thanks, that indeed looks interesting...
As I mentioned I do plan to get back to the series for adding runtime-pm support for IRQ chips, in the next week or two.
Looking forward to it!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds