[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d6200be20902251931lf563c2aw43d5266e9677e168@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:31:51 -0800
From: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
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 7:00 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>> >
>> > On the msm platform the keyboard driver currently leave the interrupts
>> > enabled when suspended. If the interrupt handler is called, we use a
>> > wakelock to abort suspend (without wakelocks you would need to set a
>> > flag and abort in suspend_late instead). If the interrupt occurs after
>> > local_irq_disable, it will still be pending when we get to the suspend
>> > enter hook and suspend will be aborted there.
>> >
>> > As far as I can tell, this change breaks this. If you press a key at
>> > the right time, it will be ignored.
>>
>> Is the irq on a private non-shared interrupt line? If so, you
>> could just mark it as IRQF_TIMER, and the irq disable logic
>> won't touch it.
That would not work without wakelocks support, since the interrupt
could occur after suspend_late which is the last chance for the driver
to abort sleep. (The patch also breaks my current wakelock
implementation since I use a suspend_late hook to abort sleep, but
this should be easy to fix)
> Hm, if that solves the problem then it would be nice to have a
> new IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag for it, in addition to IRQF_TIMER:
I think the right fix is for any interrupt that has IRQ_WAKEUP set to
abort suspend if it is pending. I don't know if anyone relies on these
interrupts being dropped now though.
--
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