public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: "Arve Hjønnevåg" <arve@android.com>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: suspend_device_irqs(): don't disable wakeup IRQs
Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 07:04:48 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <871vr22upr.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y6tb3x6r.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> (Kevin Hilman's message of "Tue\, 05 May 2009 17\:13\:48 -0700")

Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> writes:

> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> writes:
>
>> On Wednesday 06 May 2009, Kevin Hilman wrote:

[...]

>>> 
>>> [...]
>>> 
>>> >>>
>>> >>> If this fixes some bug then please provide a description of that bug?
>>> >>
>>> >> The bug is that on TI OMAP, interrupts that are used for wakeup events
>>> >> are disabled by this code causing the system to no longer wake up.
>>> >
>>> > What do you do if the interrupt triggers right after your driver has
>>> > returned from its late suspend hook?  
>>> 
>>> If it's a wakeup IRQ, I assume you want it to prevent suspend.
>>> 
>>> But I don't see how that can happen in the current code. IIUC, by the
>>> time your late suspend hook is run, your device IRQ is already
>>> disabled, so it won't trigger an interrupt that will be caught by
>>> check_wakeup_irqs() anyways.
>>
>> My understanding of __disable_irq() was that it didn't actually disable the
>> IRQ at the hardware level, allowing the CPU to actually receive the interrupt
>> and acknowledge it, but preventing the device driver for receiving it.  
>
>> Does it work differently on the affected systems?
>
> Yes.
>
> __disable_irq() calls the irq_chip's disable method which is platform
> specific.  On OMAP, this masks the IRQ at the hardware level
> preventing the CPU from seeing the interrupt.

Looking at x86, the i8259 disable hook also seems to mask the IRQ at
the PIC level.

The various IO-APIC irq_chips do not have a disable hook so the
__disable_irq() here is a NOP.

Kevin

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-05-06 14:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-05  0:27 [PATCH] PM: suspend_device_irqs(): don't disable wakeup IRQs Kevin Hilman
2009-05-05  6:54 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-05 14:11   ` [linux-pm] " Vitaly Wool
2009-05-05 15:56     ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-05 15:52   ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-05 20:58     ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2009-05-05 23:15       ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-05 23:27         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-05 23:51           ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2009-05-06  0:13           ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-06  0:38             ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-06  0:45               ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-06 14:04             ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2009-05-06 21:18               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-07  0:16                 ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-07  1:18                   ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2009-05-07  1:28                     ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-07  1:44                       ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2009-05-07  2:04                         ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-07 14:13                           ` Kevin Hilman
2009-05-07 11:54                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-06  0:20           ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-22  2:53           ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-22 16:04             ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-22 21:25               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-22 22:32                 ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-22 23:47                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-23  0:42                     ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-22 21:23             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-22 22:24               ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-22 22:29                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-22 23:03                   ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-23 20:14                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-25  7:02                       ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-29 23:35                         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-30  7:34                           ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-30  7:40                             ` Kim Kyuwon
2009-05-30 21:00                             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-05 23:57         ` Arve Hjønnevåg

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=871vr22upr.fsf@deeprootsystems.com \
    --to=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arve@android.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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