lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/5] PM / Wakeirq: Add automated device wake IRQ handling
* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [150514 09:30]:
> * Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [150514 09:12]:
>
> > > int dev_pm_request_wake_irq_managed(struct device *dev, int irq);
> >
> > I don't get this. Would this request with devm_ while the former
> > wouldn't use devm_ ?
>
> Typo :) Both can be devm no problem.
...

> > > The life cycle of the request and free of the wake irq is not the
> > > same as the life cycle of the device driver. For example, serial
> > > drivers can request interrupts on startup and free them on shutdown.
> >
> > fair enough, but then we start to consider the benefits of using
> > devm_ IRQ :-)
>
> Hmm probably the extra checks do not hurt there either.

We should keep the PM related functions called dev_pm_*, using
devm_pm_* just gets hard to pronounce.. So yeah I too am thinking
just not using devm here at all as the consumer drivers are not
allocating anything.

Regards,

Tony


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-14 20:21    [W:0.123 / U:0.596 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site