The original code for the exynos i2c controller registered for the
"noirq" variants. However during review feedback it was moved to
SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS without anyone noticing that it meant we were no
longer actually "noirq" (despite functions named
exynos5_i2c_suspend_noirq and exynos5_i2c_resume_noirq).
i2c controllers that might have wakeup sources on them seem to need to
resume at noirq time so that the individual drivers can actually read
the i2c bus to handle their wakeup.
NOTE: I took the original review feedback from Wolfram and added
poweroff, thaw, freeze, restore.
This patch has only been compile-tested since I don't have all the
patches needed to make my machine using this i2c driver actually
suspend/resume.
Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <diand...@chromium.org>
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-exynos5.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-exynos5.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-exynos5.c
index 63d2292..cba740c 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-exynos5.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-exynos5.c
@@ -789,8 +789,14 @@ static int exynos5_i2c_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
}
#endif
-static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(exynos5_i2c_dev_pm_ops, exynos5_i2c_suspend_noirq,
- exynos5_i2c_resume_noirq);
+const struct dev_pm_ops exynos5_i2c_dev_pm_ops = {
+ .suspend_noirq = exynos5_i2c_suspend_noirq,
+ .resume_noirq = exynos5_i2c_resume_noirq,
+ .freeze_noirq = exynos5_i2c_suspend_noirq,
+ .thaw_noirq = exynos5_i2c_resume_noirq,
+ .poweroff_noirq = exynos5_i2c_suspend_noirq,
+ .restore_noirq = exynos5_i2c_resume_noirq,
+};
static struct platform_driver exynos5_i2c_driver = {
.probe = exynos5_i2c_probe,
--
2.0.0.526.g5318336
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
