Hi Thomas / Kevin, I did verify Thomas Petazzoni's patch - [PATCH] omap: prcm: switch to a chained IRQ handler mechanism, and I have below questions or comments.
1. I see for each WKUP_ST or IO_ST interrupt the _prcm_int_handle_wakeup handler is getting called 2 times which impacts on performance. printk("irq:%d,%d\n",irq,c); just before returning from the handler shows. [ 221.966308] irq wkst:377,2 [ 221.968597] irq wkst:377,0 I see, the code checking the below warning is removed, won't it be good to retain this check ? WARN(c == 0, "prcm: WARNING: PRCM indicated " "MPU wakeup but no wakeup sources " "are marked\n"); Also need to address the corner case issue, for which I submitted the patch fix. [ 222.002563] irq wkst:368,3 [ 222.004913] irq iost:377,0 Regards Gowda ________________________________________ From: ext Kevin Hilman [khil...@deeprootsystems.com] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 6:36 PM To: Gowda Madhusudhan.1 (EXT-Elektrobit/Helsinki) Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; p...@pwsan.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] OMAP3: PM: PRCM interrupt: Fix warning "MPU wakeup but no wakeup sources" Madhusudhan Gowda <ext-madhusudhan.1.go...@nokia.com> writes: > A corner case where prcm_interrupt handler is handling the WKST_WKUP and > before acknowledging the wakeup sources if an IO Pad wakeup ST_IO is > indicated then hits the below warning since the wakeup sources are already > cleared. > WARN(c == 0, "prcm: WARNING: PRCM indicated " > "MPU wakeup but no wakeup sources " > "are marked\n"); > > Since the above warning condition is only valid if the prcm_interrupt > handler is called but no wakeup sources are marked in first iteration. > > The patch fixes this corner case. > > Updated after Paul Walmsley's "only handle selected PRCM interrupts" patch. Can you have a look at the recent work by Thomas Petazzoni: [PATCH] omap: prcm: switch to a chained IRQ handler mechanism where the PRCM IRQ handler is broken up to see if this problem still exists? I suspect the problem is gone as each type of interrupt is separated out, but should be verified. Kevin > > Signed-off-by: Madhusudhan Gowda <ext-madhusudhan.1.go...@nokia.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > index 75c0cd1..2ed3662 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > @@ -266,6 +266,7 @@ static irqreturn_t prcm_interrupt_handler (int irq, void > *dev_id) > { > u32 irqenable_mpu, irqstatus_mpu; > int c = 0; > + int ct = 0; > > irqenable_mpu = prm_read_mod_reg(OCP_MOD, > OMAP3_PRM_IRQENABLE_MPU_OFFSET); > @@ -277,13 +278,15 @@ static irqreturn_t prcm_interrupt_handler (int irq, > void *dev_id) > if (irqstatus_mpu & (OMAP3430_WKUP_ST_MASK | > OMAP3430_IO_ST_MASK)) { > c = _prcm_int_handle_wakeup(); > + ct++; > > /* > * Is the MPU PRCM interrupt handler racing with the > * IVA2 PRCM interrupt handler ? > */ > - WARN(c == 0, "prcm: WARNING: PRCM indicated MPU wakeup " > - "but no wakeup sources are marked\n"); > + WARN(!c && (ct == 1), "prcm: WARNING: PRCM indicated " > + "MPU wakeup but no wakeup sources " > + "are marked\n"); > } else { > /* XXX we need to expand our PRCM interrupt handler */ > WARN(1, "prcm: WARNING: PRCM interrupt received, but " -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html