linux-kernel - [PATCH 05/13] genirq: Move MASK_ON_SUSPEND handling into suspend_device

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2238551.UOAGsm8nN1@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Mon, 01 Sep 2014 16:22:48 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...gle.com>,
	Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com>
Subject: [PATCH 05/13] genirq: Move MASK_ON_SUSPEND handling into suspend_device_irqs()

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

There is no reason why we should delay the masking of interrupts whose
interrupt chip requests MASK_ON_SUSPEND to the point where we check
the wakeup interrupts. We can do it right at the point where we mark
the interrupt as suspended.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
---
 kernel/irq/pm.c |   21 +++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Index: linux/kernel/irq/pm.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/irq/pm.c
+++ linux/kernel/irq/pm.c
@@ -56,6 +56,15 @@ static void suspend_device_irq(struct ir
 
 	desc->istate |= IRQS_SUSPENDED;
 	__disable_irq(desc, irq);
+
+	/*
+	 * Hardware which has no wakeup source configuration facility
+	 * requires that the non wakeup interrupts are masked at the
+	 * chip level. The chip implementation indicates that with
+	 * IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND.
+	 */
+	if (irq_desc_get_chip(desc)->flags & IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND)
+		mask_irq(desc);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -176,19 +185,7 @@ int check_wakeup_irqs(void)
 		if (irqd_is_wakeup_set(&desc->irq_data)) {
 			if (desc->depth == 1 && desc->istate & IRQS_PENDING)
 				return -EBUSY;
-			continue;
 		}
-		/*
-		 * Check the non wakeup interrupts whether they need
-		 * to be masked before finally going into suspend
-		 * state. That's for hardware which has no wakeup
-		 * source configuration facility. The chip
-		 * implementation indicates that with
-		 * IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND.
-		 */
-		if (desc->istate & IRQS_SUSPENDED &&
-		    irq_desc_get_chip(desc)->flags & IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND)
-			mask_irq(desc);
 	}
 
 	return 0;

--
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/