From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@lists.osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [RFC] Add some hooks to generic suspend code
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 12:13:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050531101344.GB9614@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1117524577.5826.35.camel@gaston>
Hi!
> While consolidating the powermac suspend to ram and suspend to disk
> implementations to properly use the new framework in kernel/power, among
> others, I ended up with the need of adding various callbacks to
> kernel/power/main.c. Here is a patch adding & documenting those.
>
> The reasons I need them are:
>
> /* Call before process freezing. If returns 0, then no freeze
> * should be done, if 1, freeze, negative -> error
> */
> int (*pre_freeze)(suspend_state_t state);
>
> I'm using that one for calling my "old style" notifiers (they are beeing phased
> out but I still have a couple of drivers using them). The reason I do that here
> is because that's how my APM emulation hooks, and that code interacts with userland
> (to properly signal things like X of the suspend process), so I need to do that
> before we freeze processes.
This should not be needed in future, right? Could it be marked
deprecated or something?
> /* called after sysdevs and "irq off" devices have been
> * worken up, irqs have just been restored to whatever state
> * prepare_irqs() left them in.
> */
> void (*finish_irqs)(suspend_state_t state);
>
> This is the pending of the above callback. It gets called after sysdev's
> have been woken up but before normal devices have. It's called after the core has
> restored local interrupts to what they were upon exit of prepare_irqs(), so if
> you do nothing special in prepare_irqs(), you'll get entered with irqs re-enabled
> here, while if you exit prepare_irqs() with irqs off, you'll get here with irqs
> off as well (and thus become responsible for re-enabling them).
>
> I want this callback to have finer control of re-enabling interrutps. The interrupt
> controller has been partially reconfigured earlier in arch code, but the CPU priority
> is only lowered here, so that it starts hitting the CPU again only now. There is
> also some code to properly wake up the CPU decrementer so it ticks right away, and
> to force taking a pseudo-interrupt (to sort-of "kick" the interrupt controller into
> life, seems to work around an issue that I think is related to a HW bug in the
> interrupt controller we use).
Could you simply reconfigure interrupt controller fully in earlier arch code?
> /* called after unfreezing userland */
> void (*post_freeze)(suspend_state_t state);
>
> That one is the mirror of pre-freeze, gets called after userland has been re-enabled,
> it also calls my old-style notifiers, which includes APM emulation, which is important
> for sending the APM wakeup events to things like X.
Could this be marked deprecated, too?
Alternatively, proper way of notifying X (etc) should be created, and
done from generic code....
Pavel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-31 10:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-31 7:29 [RFC] Add some hooks to generic suspend code Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-05-31 10:13 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2005-05-31 14:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-05-31 21:25 ` Pavel Machek
2005-05-31 23:31 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-06-01 8:13 ` Pavel Machek
2005-06-01 8:34 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-06-01 9:06 ` Pavel Machek
2005-06-01 9:36 ` Nigel Cunningham
2005-06-01 9:55 ` Pavel Machek
2005-06-01 10:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-06-02 16:21 ` Stefan Seyfried
2005-06-02 22:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050531101344.GB9614@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox