| Message ID | 1437115241-17859-2-git-send-email-vigneshr@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Vignesh, On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:10:40PM +0530, Vignesh R wrote: > On am437x-gp-evm, pixcir touchscreen can wake the system from low power > state by generating wake-up interrupt via pinctrl and IO daisy chain. > Add support for optional wakeup interrupt source by regsitering to > automated wake IRQ framework introduced by commit 4990d4fe327b ("PM / > Wakeirq: Add automated device wake IRQ handling"). > This is similar in approach to commit 2a0b965cfb6e ("serial: omap: Add > support for optional wake-up") > > Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> > --- > drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c > index 8f3e243a62bf..f7c602027fbd 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c > +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c > @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ > #include <linux/of.h> > #include <linux/of_gpio.h> > #include <linux/of_device.h> > +#include <linux/of_irq.h> > +#include <linux/pm_wakeirq.h> > > #define PIXCIR_MAX_SLOTS 5 /* Max fingers supported by driver */ > > @@ -38,6 +40,7 @@ struct pixcir_i2c_ts_data { > const struct pixcir_ts_platform_data *pdata; > bool running; > int max_fingers; /* Max fingers supported in this instance */ > + int wakeirq; > }; > > struct pixcir_touch { > @@ -564,11 +567,22 @@ static int pixcir_i2c_ts_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > i2c_set_clientdata(client, tsdata); > device_init_wakeup(&client->dev, 1); > > + /* Register wakeirq, if available */ > + tsdata->wakeirq = of_irq_get(dev->of_node, 1); Can we put this in platform data and parse in pixcir_parse_dt() please? Also, why not of_irq_get_byname()? > + if (tsdata->wakeirq) { > + error = dev_pm_set_dedicated_wake_irq(dev, > + tsdata->wakeirq); > + if (error) > + dev_dbg(dev, "unable to get wakeirq %d\n", > + error); > + } Shouldn't his actually be: error = tsdata->wakeirq ? dev_pm_set_dedicated_wake_irq(dev, tsdata->wakeirq) : dev_pm_set_wake_irq(dev, client->irq); if (error) { ... } and then we can get rid of enable_irq_wake()/disable_irq_wake() in pixcir_i2c_ts_suspend() and pixcir_i2c_ts_resume(). > + > return 0; > } > > static int pixcir_i2c_ts_remove(struct i2c_client *client) > { > + dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(&client->dev); > device_init_wakeup(&client->dev, 0); I wonder if driver core should be responsible for clearing wake irq and also for clearing wakeup flag. Thanks.
Hi Dmitry, On 7/18/2015 3:21 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Vignesh, > > On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:10:40PM +0530, Vignesh R wrote: >> On am437x-gp-evm, pixcir touchscreen can wake the system from low power >> state by generating wake-up interrupt via pinctrl and IO daisy chain. >> Add support for optional wakeup interrupt source by regsitering to >> automated wake IRQ framework introduced by commit 4990d4fe327b ("PM / >> Wakeirq: Add automated device wake IRQ handling"). >> This is similar in approach to commit 2a0b965cfb6e ("serial: omap: Add >> support for optional wake-up") >> >> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c >> index 8f3e243a62bf..f7c602027fbd 100644 >> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c >> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c >> @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ >> #include <linux/of.h> >> #include <linux/of_gpio.h> >> #include <linux/of_device.h> >> +#include <linux/of_irq.h> >> +#include <linux/pm_wakeirq.h> >> >> #define PIXCIR_MAX_SLOTS 5 /* Max fingers supported by driver */ >> >> @@ -38,6 +40,7 @@ struct pixcir_i2c_ts_data { >> const struct pixcir_ts_platform_data *pdata; >> bool running; >> int max_fingers; /* Max fingers supported in this instance */ >> + int wakeirq; >> }; >> >> struct pixcir_touch { >> @@ -564,11 +567,22 @@ static int pixcir_i2c_ts_probe(struct i2c_client *client, >> i2c_set_clientdata(client, tsdata); >> device_init_wakeup(&client->dev, 1); >> >> + /* Register wakeirq, if available */ >> + tsdata->wakeirq = of_irq_get(dev->of_node, 1); > > Can we put this in platform data and parse in pixcir_parse_dt() please? > Also, why not of_irq_get_byname()? > Ok. >> + if (tsdata->wakeirq) { >> + error = dev_pm_set_dedicated_wake_irq(dev, >> + tsdata->wakeirq); >> + if (error) >> + dev_dbg(dev, "unable to get wakeirq %d\n", >> + error); >> + } > > Shouldn't his actually be: > > error = tsdata->wakeirq ? > dev_pm_set_dedicated_wake_irq(dev, tsdata->wakeirq) : > dev_pm_set_wake_irq(dev, client->irq); > if (error) { > ... > } > > and then we can get rid of enable_irq_wake()/disable_irq_wake() in > pixcir_i2c_ts_suspend() and pixcir_i2c_ts_resume(). > Yes, I will do this in v2. >> + >> return 0; >> } >> >> static int pixcir_i2c_ts_remove(struct i2c_client *client) >> { >> + dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(&client->dev); >> device_init_wakeup(&client->dev, 0); > > I wonder if driver core should be responsible for clearing wake irq and > also for clearing wakeup flag. > AFAICU, wakeup flag is deleted when struct device is deleted, hence, device_init_wakeup() call may not be required in .remove(). But, dev_pm_clear_wake_irq() can be moved to driver core. Regards Vignesh
* Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> [150719 21:51]: > On 7/18/2015 3:21 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > I wonder if driver core should be responsible for clearing wake irq and > > also for clearing wakeup flag. > > > > AFAICU, wakeup flag is deleted when struct device is deleted, hence, > device_init_wakeup() call may not be required in .remove(). But, > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq() can be moved to driver core. Currently the lifecycle of struct wakeup_source is not necessarily the same as the lifecycle struct device. I believe net and usb drivers at least allocate it dynamically. Regards, Tony
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:05:07PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> [150719 21:51]: > > On 7/18/2015 3:21 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > I wonder if driver core should be responsible for clearing wake irq and > > > also for clearing wakeup flag. > > > > > > > AFAICU, wakeup flag is deleted when struct device is deleted, hence, > > device_init_wakeup() call may not be required in .remove(). But, > > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq() can be moved to driver core. > > Currently the lifecycle of struct wakeup_source is not necessarily > the same as the lifecycle struct device. I believe net and usb drivers > at least allocate it dynamically. I am not sure if I follow. I was wondering if we should clear the wakeup IRQ setting on the driver unbinding. It does not mean that we'd be deleting wakeup_source, just that we'll clear wakeup irq setting from it.
* Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> [150719 23:36]: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:05:07PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> [150719 21:51]: > > > On 7/18/2015 3:21 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > > > I wonder if driver core should be responsible for clearing wake irq and > > > > also for clearing wakeup flag. > > > > > > > > > > AFAICU, wakeup flag is deleted when struct device is deleted, hence, > > > device_init_wakeup() call may not be required in .remove(). But, > > > dev_pm_clear_wake_irq() can be moved to driver core. > > > > Currently the lifecycle of struct wakeup_source is not necessarily > > the same as the lifecycle struct device. I believe net and usb drivers > > at least allocate it dynamically. > > I am not sure if I follow. I was wondering if we should clear the wakeup > IRQ setting on the driver unbinding. It does not mean that we'd be > deleting wakeup_source, just that we'll clear wakeup irq setting from > it. Yes you're right we can do that. I was mostly commenting on why we currently can't automate things further with devm. Regards, Tony
diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c index 8f3e243a62bf..f7c602027fbd 100644 --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ #include <linux/of.h> #include <linux/of_gpio.h> #include <linux/of_device.h> +#include <linux/of_irq.h> +#include <linux/pm_wakeirq.h> #define PIXCIR_MAX_SLOTS 5 /* Max fingers supported by driver */ @@ -38,6 +40,7 @@ struct pixcir_i2c_ts_data { const struct pixcir_ts_platform_data *pdata; bool running; int max_fingers; /* Max fingers supported in this instance */ + int wakeirq; }; struct pixcir_touch { @@ -564,11 +567,22 @@ static int pixcir_i2c_ts_probe(struct i2c_client *client, i2c_set_clientdata(client, tsdata); device_init_wakeup(&client->dev, 1); + /* Register wakeirq, if available */ + tsdata->wakeirq = of_irq_get(dev->of_node, 1); + if (tsdata->wakeirq) { + error = dev_pm_set_dedicated_wake_irq(dev, + tsdata->wakeirq); + if (error) + dev_dbg(dev, "unable to get wakeirq %d\n", + error); + } + return 0; } static int pixcir_i2c_ts_remove(struct i2c_client *client) { + dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(&client->dev); device_init_wakeup(&client->dev, 0); return 0;
On am437x-gp-evm, pixcir touchscreen can wake the system from low power state by generating wake-up interrupt via pinctrl and IO daisy chain. Add support for optional wakeup interrupt source by regsitering to automated wake IRQ framework introduced by commit 4990d4fe327b ("PM / Wakeirq: Add automated device wake IRQ handling"). This is similar in approach to commit 2a0b965cfb6e ("serial: omap: Add support for optional wake-up") Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> --- drivers/input/touchscreen/pixcir_i2c_ts.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)