[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903111459210.32478@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/10] PM: Rework handling of interrupts during suspend-resume
(rev. 5)
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> I'm not worried about nested ones.
Then you shouldn't be worried about IRQ_SUSPENDED at all, since that one
increments the disabled depth count.
So _all_ disable/enable_irq calls will by definition be nested inside
IRQ_SUSPENDED.
Linus
--
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