mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] genirq: Add runtime resume/suspend support for IRQ chips
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 09:46:43 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5649A603.6020308@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1511131456440.3987@nanos>


On 13/11/15 20:01, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2015, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> On 12/11/15 23:20, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>> If all the RPM devices in the domain go idle, it will be powered off
>>> independently of the status of the irqchip because the irqchip isn't
>>> using RPM. 
>>
>> That's dependent on how the irqchip uses these helpers. If these helpers
>> invoke RPM then that will not be the case.
> 
> You need a very proper description of how that domain is working. If
> all devices are idle, it's not necessary correct to power down the
> irqchip as is might serve other devices as well.

Agreed. The irqchip should only be powered down if there are no
interrupts in-use/requested. Runtime-pm will keep a reference count for
all requested IRQs.

> OTOH, if it can be powered down then all idle devices need to release
> the irq they requested because request_irq() would hold a ref on the
> power domain.

Yes.

> I have no idea how you can describe that proper.

Do you mean properly describe the interaction between runtime-pm and the
irqchip?

>>> Is there a longer-term plan to handle the irqchips as a "normal" device
>>> and use RPM?  IMO, that approach would be helpful even for irqchips that
>>> share power domains with CPUs, since there are efforts working towards
>>> using genpd/RPM to manage CPUs/clusters.
>>
>> That would ideal. However, the majority of irqchips today
>> create/register them with IRQCHIP_DECLARE() and not as "normal" devices.
>> Therefore, I was reluctant to add "struct device" to the irqchip
>> structure. However, if this is what you would prefer and Thomas is ok
>> with it, then that would be fine with me.
> 
> I have no objections against that, but how is the 'struct device'
> going to be initialized?

It would be initialised by the irqchip driver. However, it would be
optional. The genirq core could simply check to see if the chip->dev
member is initialised and if so enable runtime-pm.

Cheers
Jon

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-16  9:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-10 14:39 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add support for Tegra210 AGIC Jon Hunter
2015-11-10 14:39 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] genirq: Add runtime resume/suspend support for IRQ chips Jon Hunter
2015-11-10 15:26   ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-11-10 15:58     ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-10 16:47       ` Grygorii Strashko
2015-11-10 18:07         ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-11-11 10:13           ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-11 15:41             ` Grygorii Strashko
2015-11-12 10:59               ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-12 13:20                 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-11-12 13:29                   ` Grygorii Strashko
2015-11-12 13:34                     ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-11-13 18:07                       ` Grygorii Strashko
2015-11-12 13:35                   ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-12 13:47                     ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-11-12 14:02                       ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-12 14:37                         ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-11-12 15:38                           ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-12 17:04       ` Sören Brinkmann
2015-11-12 23:20   ` Kevin Hilman
2015-11-13  9:01     ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-13 20:01       ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-11-16  9:46         ` Jon Hunter [this message]
2015-11-16  9:49           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-11-16 10:34             ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-16 10:48               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-11-17 11:57                 ` Jon Hunter
2015-11-10 14:39 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] irqchip/gic: Add support for tegra AGIC interrupt controller Jon Hunter

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5649A603.6020308@nvidia.com \
    --to=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
    --cc=khilman@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome