[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d6200be20902252024ie529433r9790f5d5ec7b8b5a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:24:03 -0800
From: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] PM: Rework handling of interrupts during
suspend-resume
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Eric W. Biederman
<ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com> writes:
>
>> We only have one gpio input driver, but I don't think is good to loose
>> any wakeup interrupts. Any driver that needs an edge triggered wakeup
>> interrupt will have problems if the hardware does not regenerate the
>> interrupt when the host does not respond.
>
> We are not loosing interrupts. The normal implementation of disable
> is a software disable and sets IRQ_PENDING to ensure we don't loose
> interrupts when the interrupt is disabled.
We loose the wakeup, but yes, the interrupt will be delivered if the
system wakes up for any other reason.
--
Arve Hjønnevåg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists