Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp4203448imu; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:41:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/USiV5gAmokB3YvBayDdGfW6zz+QTqbJD6cOFUfRY6Kzh8H7Gdq1xAcTFgtHM9mcbXbxem7 X-Received: by 2002:a62:5ec5:: with SMTP id s188mr17214805pfb.145.1545158479177; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:41:19 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1545158479; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=gInOIw3mezxzz0TYf6vtZB+g68vw4VLqE/uae+vXCVTpIrTRdS73OF8/VWHr1mntNu /1ma35bfzfDo2WP/rsMCRX8nB+8d7kdfcU7ZWBrKJ6FuLZh3zvrVjT49OxaZkGlvcJDa uBWKLGHKUNYFmkjnx3xM+lNlM2N4fdotd4oBKyi2ZJcdsa5qwZO6/w+ZEyxQe3K5LD3t gx3CPwMR+ovyCbRRStyFHd8rl1H7wOD5r0hKtY7G1MaUT+lAqdlCcTJr+GtViXiICu6j opMzXqzgrnNvohQPOaRxs0LILrsslN7CZBhHPatwQfN8fpNGDFN1f6zsH3CZgv1yhMRa 6daQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dmarc-filter:dkim-signature:dkim-signature; bh=xoXEQo2oSV42KIejP6sHE6rxna2zx2yBedBcnZ4lxx0=; b=VKCb5jMs1hFqGtV4ZxWuQMpqessenN1t7S3LX4rD73iRiFngWub7aFLu2tn8W0/RZd aCplBiKg1QNWoeem7kcCHyfD2RO/QsaB57tFRO983mMYvuvU8/RmTSbSuydinpjlCY5t e0eV/qt2ZaOZFRqsFfx7BvY5RBojRUvg+ag4ydBYE0zFT3BoN71OAdoV24dIOrhpcpWo cL7nbDYfpiGNZ6wb2eIYEnT0eZXCo/NMxXRzfSW/O0XNZDhbwjP0HHOEUBS+/N/sl5qr 58Mhs2ri17hq6P2fXd+6ZVtLoJWRw+Nddd0orqoTC9ZM25us1a7A0wISZyScutPimGAU GxwA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=F79QD7pK; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=F79QD7pK; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g69si14382233pfg.225.2018.12.18.10.41.03; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:41:19 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=F79QD7pK; dkim=pass header.i=@codeaurora.org header.s=default header.b=F79QD7pK; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727210AbeLRSBy (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 18 Dec 2018 13:01:54 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:43020 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726611AbeLRSBx (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2018 13:01:53 -0500 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D617E607CA; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 18:01:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1545156112; bh=xoXEQo2oSV42KIejP6sHE6rxna2zx2yBedBcnZ4lxx0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F79QD7pK0wvO5wRwF7xA7zpqmLfS0922FORYAWm2oQUIBoNRTy0aIUnCwAAP9/Fxv JllgF8cCR3MZ9WkvTyQJVJ/ZCK7VQHcAQsReWVSDQs4TzBfU+1KsMGAhnjFwR1vdNo px3Hrqz3v5qBOYZiR7SD4g4IN0NImspZVidUURWE= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=2.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from localhost (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ilina@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF26D6055D; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 18:01:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1545156112; bh=xoXEQo2oSV42KIejP6sHE6rxna2zx2yBedBcnZ4lxx0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F79QD7pK0wvO5wRwF7xA7zpqmLfS0922FORYAWm2oQUIBoNRTy0aIUnCwAAP9/Fxv JllgF8cCR3MZ9WkvTyQJVJ/ZCK7VQHcAQsReWVSDQs4TzBfU+1KsMGAhnjFwR1vdNo px3Hrqz3v5qBOYZiR7SD4g4IN0NImspZVidUURWE= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org DF26D6055D Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ilina@codeaurora.org Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 11:01:51 -0700 From: Lina Iyer To: Stephen Boyd Cc: Bjorn Andersson , evgreen@chromium.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rplsssn@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com Subject: Re: [RFC v3 2/3] dt-bindings: sdm845-pinctrl: add wakeup interrupt parent for GPIO Message-ID: <20181218180151.GD24024@codeaurora.org> References: <154283618199.88331.10217252750356423959@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <20181126161455.GA28236@codeaurora.org> <154330994255.88331.11409511159882116164@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <20181127182123.GC28236@codeaurora.org> <154335513853.88331.9713562640538396853@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <20181128173959.GC18262@codeaurora.org> <20181129002457.GJ24969@minitux> <20181129214539.GG18262@codeaurora.org> <20181130183317.GL18262@codeaurora.org> <154388090959.88331.13819513007141877197@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <154388090959.88331.13819513007141877197@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 03 2018 at 16:48 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: >Quoting Lina Iyer (2018-11-30 10:33:17) >> On Thu, Nov 29 2018 at 14:45 -0700, Lina Iyer wrote: >> >On Wed, Nov 28 2018 at 17:25 -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >> >>On Wed 28 Nov 09:39 PST 2018, Lina Iyer wrote: >> >> >> >>>On Tue, Nov 27 2018 at 14:45 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> >>>> Quoting Lina Iyer (2018-11-27 10:21:23) >> >>>> > On Tue, Nov 27 2018 at 02:12 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> >> [...] >> >BTW, I am discussing with the internal folks here on if we need to mask >> >TLMM when the wakeup-parent is MPM. If we don't have to, we should be >> >able to follow the same model as we done in this patch and don't even >> >have to check the compatible or use the approach suggested by Stephen. >> > >> The TLMM and the MPM are not active at the same time. However, there is >> a small chance they might be (a few clock cycles) when the system is >> going down, but even then, since we replay the interrupt from the MPM >> driver before the interrupts are serviced by Linux, we would not see >> multiple GPIO interrupts. >> >> The way we have MPM working downstream, for a wakeup GPIO IRQ - >> >> a. Application cores gets a wakeup interrupt either from RPM or GIC (if >> TLMM was not powered down) while still in the interrupt locked context. >> >> b. In the hardware, apps core handshakes with the RPM and then starts >> resuming from the platform's system idle driver. >> >> c. The first CPU to wake up calls MPM driver from the idle driver, which >> reads the shared memory to find the MPM pins that are set. Converts the >> MPM pins to their corresponding linux interrupt and replays the >> interrupt. >> >> d. Idle driver exits and wakeup GPIO interrupt is handled. >> >> The MPM pins are not updated after the RPM lets the application core to >> run. Since TLMM is functional after the RPM handshake, it takes over. >> > >Thanks for the background info. I don't think it really changes anything >that we've discussed though. We still need to mask the IRQ in TLMM all >the time when we're using the PDC and we need to leave it unmasked and >replay edges that the MPM sees when we use the MPM. Should I clean up my >RFC patch and post it to the list? I have started to work on this. But feel free to post your version if you have it ready. Thanks for the review Stephen. I think I understand now where you are getting with it. Sorry about all the back and forth. Thanks, Lina >I'd like to see hierarchical gpio >irqs work in general for this problem and also the SSBI/SPMI gpio irq >problem that Linus pointed out last week. >