From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: RT throttling and suspend/resume (was Re: [PATCH] i2c: omap:
 revert "i2c: omap: switch to threaded IRQ support")
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:00:27 +0200
Message-ID: <1350655227.2768.11.camel@twins>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210150148080.16624@utopia.booyaka.com>
	 <CAM=Q2csHTbR4rBe1HNr5-M3sG5wgdCv6dCnGLmNQEwo1gjCSGg@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20121016133356.GG21801@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
	 <87ipaanljt.fsf_-_@deeprootsystems.com>
	 <20121017140002.GI11394@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
	 <20121017143534.GJ11394@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
	 <87txtsitpt.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
	 <20121018055136.GF11137@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Return-path: <linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <20121018055136.GF11137-S8G//mZuvNWo5Im9Ml3/Zg@public.gmane.org>
Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
To: balbi-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman-1D3HCaltpLuhEniVeURVKkEOCMrvLtNR@public.gmane.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>, Shubhrajyoti Datta <omaplinuxkernel-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Paul Walmsley <paul-DWxLp4Yu+b8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>, Wolfram Sang <w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>, Ben Dooks <ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>, linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Russell King <rmk+kernel-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>
List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 08:51 +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > So the primary question remains: is RT runtime supposed to include the
> > time spent suspended?  I suspect not. 
> 
> you might be right there, though we need Thomas or Peter to answer :-s 

re, sorry both tglx and I have been traveling, he still is, I'm trying
to play catch-up :-)

Anyway, yeah I'm somewhat surprised the clock is 'running' when the
machine isn't. From what I could gather, this is !x86 hardware, right?

x86 explicitly makes sure our clocks are 'stopped' during suspend, see
commit cd7240c0b900eb6d690ccee088a6c9b46dae815a.

Can you do something similar for ARM? A quick look at
arch/arm/kernel/sched_clock.c shows there's already suspend/resume
hooks, do they do the wrong thing?