Jon, On Tue, 10 Nov 2015, Jon Hunter wrote: > void (*irq_suspend)(struct irq_data *data); > void (*irq_resume)(struct irq_data *data); > + int (*irq_runtime_suspend)(struct irq_data *data); > + int (*irq_runtime_resume)(struct irq_data *data); > void (*irq_pm_shutdown)(struct irq_data *data);
So this is the second patch within a few days which adds that just with different names: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Can you folks please tell me which of the names is the correct one? > +/* Inline functions for support of irq chips that require runtime pm */ > +static inline int chip_runtime_resume(struct irq_desc *desc) > +{ > + if (!desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_resume) > + return 0; > + > + return desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_resume(&desc->irq_data); > +} > + > +static inline int chip_runtime_suspend(struct irq_desc *desc) > +{ > + if (!desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_suspend) > + return 0; > + > + return desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_suspend(&desc->irq_data); We really don't need a return value for that one. > +} > + > #define _IRQ_DESC_CHECK (1 << 0) > #define _IRQ_DESC_PERCPU (1 << 1) > > diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c > index 0eebaeef317b..66e33df73140 100644 > --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c > +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c > @@ -1116,6 +1116,10 @@ __setup_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc, > struct irqaction *new) > if (!try_module_get(desc->owner)) > return -ENODEV; > > + ret = chip_runtime_resume(desc); > + if (ret < 0) > + return ret; Leaks module ref count. > + > new->irq = irq; > > /* > @@ -1393,6 +1397,7 @@ out_thread: > put_task_struct(t); > } > out_mput: > + chip_runtime_suspend(desc); > module_put(desc->owner); > return ret; > } > @@ -1506,6 +1511,7 @@ static struct irqaction *__free_irq(unsigned int irq, > void *dev_id) > } > } > > + chip_runtime_suspend(desc); > module_put(desc->owner); > kfree(action->secondary); > return action; > @@ -1792,6 +1798,7 @@ static struct irqaction *__free_percpu_irq(unsigned int > irq, void __percpu *dev_ > > unregister_handler_proc(irq, action); > > + chip_runtime_suspend(desc); Where is the corresponding call in request_percpu_irq() ? Can you folks please agree on something which is correct and complete? Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
