From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] irq / PM: New driver interface for wakeup interruptsn
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 16:29:40 +0200
Message-ID: <3855585.ek3PTQLkmN@vostro.rjw.lan>
References: <20140724212620.GO3935@laptop> <19816559.O6O5RjzKM1@vostro.rjw.lan> <alpine.DEB.2.10.1408011533580.4997@nanos>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Return-path: <linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:56512 "HELO
	v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with SMTP id S1750738AbaHAOLF (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 1 Aug 2014 10:11:05 -0400
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1408011533580.4997@nanos>
Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@google.com>

On Friday, August 01, 2014 03:43:21 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > OK, I guess "IRQ_HANDLED from a wakeup interrupt" may be interpreted as
> > IRQ_HANDLED_PMWAKE.  On the other hand, if that's going to be handled in
> > handle_irq_event_percpu(), then using a special return code would save us
> > a brach for IRQ_HANDLED interrupts.  We could convert it to IRQ_HANDLED
> > immediately then.
> 
> We can handle it at the end of the function by calling
> note_interrupt() unconditionally do the following there:
> 
>       if (suspended) {
>       	 if (ret == IRQ_NONE) {
> 	    if (shared)
> 	       yell_and_abort_or_resume();
>          } else {
> 	    abort_or_resume();
>          }
>       }
>       if (noirqdebug)
>       	 return;

I see.

> > OK, I'll take a stab at the IRQF_SHARED thing if you don't mind.
> 
> Definitely not :)
> 
> > Here's my current understanding of what can be done for IRQF_NO_SUSPEND.
> > 
> > In suspend_device_irqs():
> > 
> > (1) If all actions in the list have the same setting (eg. IRQF_NO_SUSPEND unset),
> >     keep the current behavior.
> > (2) If the actions have different settings:
> >     - Actions with IRQF_NO_SUSPEND set are not modified.
> >     - Actions with IRQF_NO_SUSPEND unset are switched over to a stub handler.
> >     - IRQS_SUSPEND_MODE (new flag) is set for the IRQ.
> 
> Can we please do that in setup_irq() and let the shared ones always
> run through the stub? That keeps suspend/resume_device_irqs() simple.

OK

Rafael