[PATCH v2 3/3] gpio: brcmstb: allow parent_irq to wake
Andy Shevchenko
andy.shevchenko at gmail.com
Thu Jan 29 06:23:41 PST 2026
On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 11:47 PM Florian Fainelli
<florian.fainelli at broadcom.com> wrote:
> The classic parent_wake_irq can only occur after the system has
> been placed into a hardware managed power management state. This
> prevents its use for waking from software managed suspend states
> like s2idle.
>
> By allowing the parent_irq to be enabled for wake enabled GPIO
> during suspend, these GPIO can now be used to wake from these
> states. The 'suspended' boolean is introduced to support wake
> event accounting.
...
> if (of_property_read_bool(np, "wakeup-source")) {
> + /*
> + * Set wakeup capability so we can process boot-time
> + * "wakeups" (e.g., from S5 cold boot)
While at it, add a period at the end.
> + */
> + device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, true);
> + device_wakeup_enable(dev);
> }
...
> + /* disable interrupts */
Still the comment is useless.
> + if (priv->parent_irq > 0)
> + disable_irq(priv->parent_irq);
And looking more at this, I don't see why we even need the check. Does
the code WARNs or so when there is no parent_irq available?
*Yes, I saw this is the original code, perhaps can be addressed in a follow up.
...
> + /* disable interrupts while we save the masks */
> + if (priv->parent_irq > 0)
Ditto.
> + disable_irq(priv->parent_irq);
...
> + /* disable interrupts while we restore the masks */
> + if (priv->parent_wake_irq)
Ditto.
> + disable_irq(priv->parent_irq);
...
> + /* re-enable interrupts */
> + if (priv->parent_irq > 0)
Same here.
> enable_irq(priv->parent_irq);
...
All we are diving into is the 2 questions:
- is 0 on the particular platform an IRQ number and there is no sparse
tree enabled?
- is maple tree implementation clever enough to not crash (or have
side effects) when we ask for a non-existing index?
Anyway, this can be done later on.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list