Vinod,
As mentioned by Andy, we are using *_noirq verion of suspend/resume PM
callback whereby the callbacks would be executed after IRQ handlers have been
disabled. If using SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS, it would be the normal
suspend/resume PM callback. Looking at the Desginware DMAC platform code
(drivers/dma/dw/platform.c), it is using the *_noirq suspend/resume PM
callback. Is it advisable to use the normal suspend/resume PM callback instead
of *_noirq suspend/PM callback?
Thanks,
Chiau Ee
-----Original Message-----
From: Shevchenko, Andriy
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 7:57 PM
To: Koul, Vinod
Cc: Chew, Chiau Ee; Viresh Kumar; Andy Shevchenko; Williams, Dan J;
dmaeng...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma: dw: Add suspend and resume handling for PCI mode
DW_DMAC.
On Tue, 2013-12-10 at 15:40 +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:06:13PM +0800, Chew Chiau Ee wrote:
> > From: Chew, Chiau Ee <chiau.ee.c...@intel.com>
> >
> > This is to disable/enable DW_DMAC hw during suspend/resume.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chew, Chiau Ee <chiau.ee.c...@intel.com>
> > Acked-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/dma/dw/pci.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/dma/dw/pci.c b/drivers/dma/dw/pci.c index
> > e89fc24..97bc3a2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/dma/dw/pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/dma/dw/pci.c
> > @@ -75,6 +75,36 @@ static void dw_pci_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "can't remove device properly: %d\n",
> > ret);
> > }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> > +
> > +static int dw_pci_suspend_noirq(struct device *dev) {
> > + struct pci_dev *pci = to_pci_dev(dev);
> > + struct dw_dma_chip *chip = pci_get_drvdata(pci);
> > +
> > + return dw_dma_suspend(chip);
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int dw_pci_resume_noirq(struct device *dev) {
> > + struct pci_dev *pci = to_pci_dev(dev);
> > + struct dw_dma_chip *chip = pci_get_drvdata(pci);
> > +
> > + return dw_dma_resume(chip);
> > +};
> > +
> > +#else /* !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */
> > +
> > +#define dw_pci_suspend_noirq NULL
> > +#define dw_pci_resume_noirq NULL
> > +
> > +#endif /* !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */
> How about SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS instead?
So, we are using *_noirq versions of the functions here. What happened when we
switch to normal ones? Any side effects?
>
> --
> ~Vinod
> > +
> > +static const struct dev_pm_ops dw_pci_dev_pm_ops = {
> > + .suspend_noirq = dw_pci_suspend_noirq,
> > + .resume_noirq = dw_pci_resume_noirq, };
> > +
> > static DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(dw_pci_id_table) = {
> > /* Medfield */
> > { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, 0x0827), (kernel_ulong_t)&dw_pci_pdata }, @@
> > -92,6 +122,9 @@ static struct pci_driver dw_pci_driver = {
> > .id_table = dw_pci_id_table,
> > .probe = dw_pci_probe,
> > .remove = dw_pci_remove,
> > + .driver = {
> > + .pm = &dw_pci_dev_pm_ops,
> > + },
> > };
> >
> > module_pci_driver(dw_pci_driver);
> > --
> > 1.7.4.4
> >
>
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@intel.com> Intel Finland Oy
N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{����zX����ܨ}���Ơz�&j:+v�������zZ+��+zf���h���~����i���z� �w���?�����&�)ߢf��^jǫy�m��@A�a���
0��h���i
