[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d6200be20905061818h58145d5fie5c55ceaf900a196@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 18:18:23 -0700
From: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: suspend_device_irqs(): don't disable wakeup IRQs
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Kevin Hilman
<khilman@...prootsystems.com> wrote:
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> writes:
>
>> On Wednesday 06 May 2009, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>> Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com> writes:
> There is at least one problem with that which is why Kyuwon Kim added
> the ->disable hook to OMAP's irq_chip. The problem is with drivers
> that call disable_irq() in their suspend hook, usually done to prevent
> the device from waking the system since on OMAP, any IRQ can be
> configured to wake the system.
>
This does not sound correct. disable_irq_wake should be used for this.
A driver may need to mask its interrupt before suspending but this
should not also disable it as a wakeup source.
> If a driver's suspend hook calls disable_irq() and the system is
> suspended before the lazy disable happens in the next handler, then
> the system will be suspended with that device's IRQ still enabled.
> Without an irq_chip->disable hook, that will result in that device IRQ
> waking up the system if it fires.
The platform suspend code needs to write the wakeup mask into
interrupt controller the before entering suspend.
--
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