"Premi, Sanjeev" <[email protected]> writes:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Hilman, Kevin
>> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 8:52 PM
>> To: Premi, Sanjeev
>> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap3: pm: Downgrade WARN for no wakeup source
>>
>> Hi Sanjeev,
>>
>> Sanjeev Premi <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > When multiple wakeup sources are defined in a system,
>> > there is a small window, when more than one source
>> > can trigger wakeup interrupt.
>> >
>> > In the current implementation, the do-while() loop
>> > can handle all wakeup sources that are recorded when
>> > probing the status register in prcm_interrupt_handler().
>> >
>> > When the ISR executes due to next queued wakeup, it
>> > there is nothing to be handled and value of "c" is 0.
>>
>> Thanks for tracking this one down.
>>
>> However, It's still not clear to me what is happening here.
>>
>> Why is the IRQ firing if there is nothing to be handled?
>> That suggests
>> to me that the IRQ status is not properly being cleared.
>
> [SP] On the contrary the IRQ status is actually getting cleared,
> but there are more than "1" PRCM interrupts queued.
>
> The do-while() clears all the interrupt sources that
> are flagged in the status register.
>
> When the next wakeup interrupt is getting processed, the
> status register doesn't contain any "source" to handle.
Still confused.
If a wakeup interrupt is fired, it was caused by something.
IOW, if "the status register doesn't contain any source", how is
if (irqstatus_mpu & (OMAP3430_WKUP_ST_MASK |
OMAP3430_IO_ST_MASK))
ever true?
Kevin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
