Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] PM: Rework handling of interrupts during suspend-resume

[Arve Hjønnevåg]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:50 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thursday 26 February 2009, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > BTW, appended is the current (3rd) version of the $subject patch with some
>> > of your comments taken into account.  In particular, I did the following:
>> > - moved [suspend|resume]_device_irqs() to a separate file (pm.c)
>> > - fixed interrupt.h so that their headers are at a better place
>> > - made enable_irq() clear IRQ_SUSPENDED
>> > - made device_power_down() and device_power_up() call
>> >  suspend_device_irqs() and resume_device_irqs(), respectively, which
>> >  simplified the callers quite a bit (it changed the Xen code ordering, though,
>> >  but I _think_ it still should work).
>>
>> Do you plan to fix edge triggered wakeup interrupts? It still looks
>> like edge triggered wakeup interrupts that occur between
>> suspend_device_irqs and local_irq_disable will not cause a wakeup.
>
> In the current version of the patch the interrupts that have IRQ_WAKEUP set
> in status are not disabled.  Is this not enough?

That is enough for drivers that use wakelocks to abort suspend (if I
fix the wakelock code to not use a platform device as its last abort
point). It is not enough if you don't have wakelocks, since the
interrupt can occur after suspend_late has been called and the driver
has no way to abort suspend.

-- 
Arve Hjønnevåg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/