Re: Ottawa [topics]

[Pavel Machek <pavel-+ZI9xUNit7I@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1283 bytes --]

On Čt 17-03-05 15:44:53, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 15:11, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, David Brownell wrote:
> > 
> > > > Wether the system IRQs must be masked or not is one thing that is
> > > > platform specific during suspend. Wether devices must stop their IRQ
> > > > emission, well... 
> > > 
> > > What's a "system IRQ" as opposed to any other kind?  Drivers don't
> > > generally know or care how their IRQs are routed, they just care
> > > that they get a callback.
> > 
> > Given that on some platforms it's necessary to leave some IRQs enabled for 
> > remote wakeup to work, the definitions of FREEZE and SUSPEND need to be 
> > changed.  A quiesced device does not perform DMA and does not generate 
> > interrupt requests _except_ that it may issue wakeup requests (which may 
> > be IRQs) if it is enabled for remote wakeup.
> 
> I don't think the definition of FREEZE needs to be changed because -
> unless I misunderstand - it is only used when swsusp and Suspend2 are
> doing their atomic copies. Pavel, is this right?

Yes, I think so.
								Pavel

-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]