On Thursday, February 12, 2015 02:24:47 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 05:03:44AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Index: linux-pm/include/linux/cpuidle.h > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/cpuidle.h > > +++ linux-pm/include/linux/cpuidle.h > > @@ -50,6 +50,10 @@ struct cpuidle_state { > > int index); > > > > int (*enter_dead) (struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index); > > Do we want a comment here describing that enter_freeze() must not > re-enable interrupts _ever_? > > To help people who want to enable this on their platform. Good point. I'll update the patch later today. > > + > > + void (*enter_freeze) (struct cpuidle_device *dev, > > + struct cpuidle_driver *drv, > > + int index); > > }; > > > +static void enter_freeze_proper(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, > > + struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index) > > +{ > > + tick_freeze(); > > + /* > > + * The state used here cannot be a "coupled" one, because the "coupled" > > + * cpuidle mechanism enables interrupts and doing that with timekeeping > > + * suspended is generally unsafe. > > + */ > > + drv->states[index].enter_freeze(dev, drv, index); > > WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()); > > To go along with the comment and catch fail? Yeah, will do. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html