| Message ID | 20140729163345.GF17808@saruman.home |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
* Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [140729 09:36]: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:40:57AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:20:52AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > * Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [140729 07:18]: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:14:25AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > * Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [140728 14:19]: > > > > > > now that we don't need to support legacy board-files, > > > > > > we can completely switch over to a linear irq domain > > > > > > and make use of irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips() to > > > > > > allocate all generic irq chips for us. > > > > > > > > > > This patch seems to somehow break off-idle for omap3 > > > > > where it no longer wakes up. > > > > > > > > Sure your bisection is correct ? This patch just switches from legacy > > > > irq domain to linear irq domain. > > > > > > Yes, I tried it a few times. Just enabling > > > retention idle hangs too with this patch. > > > > > > Maybe it's omap3_prcm_irq_setup that relies on > > > 11 + OMAP_INTC_START? There may be other such issues > > > > lol. > > > > OMAP4 has the same nonsense. > > made me think why (if) OMAP4 works with that same setup. Does wake from > OFF work with OMAP4 ? Not without similar changes, omap4+ has the same issue.. There's a RFC series from Nishant to fix some of this, and Tero is moving the PRCM into a driver. > Anyway, here's a quick little hack to check if that's the reason for the > regression: OK yeah that's along the same lines with Nishant's RFC series in thread "[RFC PATCH 0/7] ARM: OMAP4+: PRM: minor cleanups and dt support of interrupts" FYI, it did not compile, needs to include linux/of_irq.h. But yes, it fixes the regression for me, Also now the whole series works for me :) Regards, Tony > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi > index ff953c9..c234b98 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ > prm: prm@48306000 { > compatible = "ti,omap3-prm"; > reg = <0x48306000 0x4000>; > + interrupts = <11>; > > prm_clocks: clocks { > #address-cells = <1>; > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c > index 25e8b82..3d11377 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c > @@ -242,6 +242,11 @@ void omap_prcm_irq_complete(void) > prcm_irq_setup->restore_irqen(prcm_irq_setup->saved_mask); > } > > +static struct of_device_id tmp[] = { > + { .compatible = "ti,omap3-prm" }, > + { } > +}; > + > /** > * omap_prcm_register_chain_handler - initializes the prcm chained interrupt > * handler based on provided parameters > @@ -254,17 +259,24 @@ void omap_prcm_irq_complete(void) > */ > int omap_prcm_register_chain_handler(struct omap_prcm_irq_setup *irq_setup) > { > + struct device_node *node; > int nr_regs; > u32 mask[OMAP_PRCM_MAX_NR_PENDING_REG]; > int offset, i; > + int irq; > struct irq_chip_generic *gc; > struct irq_chip_type *ct; > > if (!irq_setup) > return -EINVAL; > > + irq = irq_setup->irq; > nr_regs = irq_setup->nr_regs; > > + node = of_find_matching_node(NULL, tmp); > + if (node) > + irq = of_irq_get(node, 0); > + > if (prcm_irq_setup) { > pr_err("PRCM: already initialized; won't reinitialize\n"); > return -EINVAL; > @@ -298,7 +310,7 @@ int omap_prcm_register_chain_handler(struct omap_prcm_irq_setup *irq_setup) > 1 << (offset & 0x1f); > } > > - irq_set_chained_handler(irq_setup->irq, omap_prcm_irq_handler); > + irq_set_chained_handler(irq, omap_prcm_irq_handler); > > irq_setup->base_irq = irq_alloc_descs(-1, 0, irq_setup->nr_regs * 32, > 0); > > -- > balbi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
HI, On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:04:21PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [140729 09:36]: > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:40:57AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:20:52AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > * Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [140729 07:18]: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:14:25AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > > * Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [140728 14:19]: > > > > > > > now that we don't need to support legacy board-files, > > > > > > > we can completely switch over to a linear irq domain > > > > > > > and make use of irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips() to > > > > > > > allocate all generic irq chips for us. > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch seems to somehow break off-idle for omap3 > > > > > > where it no longer wakes up. > > > > > > > > > > Sure your bisection is correct ? This patch just switches from legacy > > > > > irq domain to linear irq domain. > > > > > > > > Yes, I tried it a few times. Just enabling > > > > retention idle hangs too with this patch. > > > > > > > > Maybe it's omap3_prcm_irq_setup that relies on > > > > 11 + OMAP_INTC_START? There may be other such issues > > > > > > lol. > > > > > > OMAP4 has the same nonsense. > > > > made me think why (if) OMAP4 works with that same setup. Does wake from > > OFF work with OMAP4 ? > > Not without similar changes, omap4+ has the same issue.. There's a RFC > series from Nishant to fix some of this, and Tero is moving the PRCM > into a driver. > > > Anyway, here's a quick little hack to check if that's the reason for the > > regression: > > OK yeah that's along the same lines with Nishant's RFC series in thread > "[RFC PATCH 0/7] ARM: OMAP4+: PRM: minor cleanups and dt support of > interrupts" > > FYI, it did not compile, needs to include linux/of_irq.h. But yes, I might have sent the wrong version as I had that same build error and fixed it localy. > it fixes the regression for me, Also now the whole series works for > me :) good to know. What do you want to do now ? Wait for PRCM to become a driver ? Wait for Nishanth's series to get accepted ? I guess the same thing could be done for OMAP3 and AM33, then we would have a chance of having working wake from idle with the new irqchip. cheers
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi index ff953c9..c234b98 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ prm: prm@48306000 { compatible = "ti,omap3-prm"; reg = <0x48306000 0x4000>; + interrupts = <11>; prm_clocks: clocks { #address-cells = <1>; diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c index 25e8b82..3d11377 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c @@ -242,6 +242,11 @@ void omap_prcm_irq_complete(void) prcm_irq_setup->restore_irqen(prcm_irq_setup->saved_mask); } +static struct of_device_id tmp[] = { + { .compatible = "ti,omap3-prm" }, + { } +}; + /** * omap_prcm_register_chain_handler - initializes the prcm chained interrupt * handler based on provided parameters @@ -254,17 +259,24 @@ void omap_prcm_irq_complete(void) */ int omap_prcm_register_chain_handler(struct omap_prcm_irq_setup *irq_setup) { + struct device_node *node; int nr_regs; u32 mask[OMAP_PRCM_MAX_NR_PENDING_REG]; int offset, i; + int irq; struct irq_chip_generic *gc; struct irq_chip_type *ct; if (!irq_setup) return -EINVAL; + irq = irq_setup->irq; nr_regs = irq_setup->nr_regs; + node = of_find_matching_node(NULL, tmp); + if (node) + irq = of_irq_get(node, 0); + if (prcm_irq_setup) { pr_err("PRCM: already initialized; won't reinitialize\n"); return -EINVAL; @@ -298,7 +310,7 @@ int omap_prcm_register_chain_handler(struct omap_prcm_irq_setup *irq_setup) 1 << (offset & 0x1f); } - irq_set_chained_handler(irq_setup->irq, omap_prcm_irq_handler); + irq_set_chained_handler(irq, omap_prcm_irq_handler); irq_setup->base_irq = irq_alloc_descs(-1, 0, irq_setup->nr_regs * 32, 0);