[PATCH 29/35] arm: omap: intc: switch over to linear irq domain

[Nishanth Menon]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Felipe Balbi <balbi at ti.com> wrote:
> HI,
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:04:21PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> * Felipe Balbi <balbi at ti.com> [140729 09:36]:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:40:57AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:20:52AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> > > > * Felipe Balbi <balbi at ti.com> [140729 07:18]:
>> > > > > Hi,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 05:14:25AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> > > > > > * Felipe Balbi <balbi at ti.com> [140728 14:19]:
>> > > > > > > now that we don't need to support legacy board-files,
>> > > > > > > we can completely switch over to a linear irq domain
>> > > > > > > and make use of irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips() to
>> > > > > > > allocate all generic irq chips for us.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > This patch seems to somehow break off-idle for omap3
>> > > > > > where it no longer wakes up.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Sure your bisection is correct ? This patch just switches from legacy
>> > > > > irq domain to linear irq domain.
>> > > >
>> > > > Yes, I tried it a few times. Just enabling
>> > > > retention idle hangs too with this patch.
>> > > >
>> > > > Maybe it's omap3_prcm_irq_setup that relies on
>> > > > 11 + OMAP_INTC_START? There may be other such issues
>> > >
>> > > lol.
>> > >
>> > > OMAP4 has the same nonsense.
>> >
>> > made me think why (if) OMAP4 works with that same setup. Does wake from
>> > OFF work with OMAP4 ?
>>
>> Not without similar changes, omap4+ has the same issue.. There's a RFC
>> series from Nishant to fix some of this, and Tero is moving the PRCM
>> into a driver.
>>
>> > Anyway, here's a quick little hack to check if that's the reason for the
>> > regression:
>>
>> OK yeah that's along the same lines with Nishant's RFC series in thread
>> "[RFC PATCH 0/7] ARM: OMAP4+: PRM: minor cleanups and dt support of
>> interrupts"
>>
>> FYI, it did not compile, needs to include linux/of_irq.h. But yes,
>
> I might have sent the wrong version as I had that same build error and
> fixed it localy.
>
>> it fixes the regression for me, Also now the whole series works for
>> me :)
>
> good to know.
>
> What do you want to do now ? Wait for PRCM to become a driver ? Wait for
> Nishanth's series to get accepted ? I guess the same thing could be done
> for OMAP3 and AM33, then we would have a chance of having working wake
> from idle with the new irqchip.

I can repost the current series as it stands now once 17-rc1 comes out
(without the build failure ofcourse).. if that helps to move it out of
RFC status.


-- 
---
Regards,
Nishanth Menon