"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> writes: > On Tuesday, August 10, 2010, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> When using runtime PM in combination with CPUidle, the runtime PM >> transtions of some devices may be triggered during the idle path. >> Late in the idle sequence, interrupts will likely be disabled when >> runtime PM for these devices is initiated. >> >> Currently, the runtime PM core assumes methods are called with >> interrupts enabled. However, if it is called with interrupts >> disabled, the internal locking unconditionally enables interrupts, for >> example: >> >> pm_runtime_put_sync() > > Please don't use that from interrupt context. I'm not using this in interrupt context. I'm using it in process context where interrupts are disabled, specifically, the idle thread. > There's pm_runtime_put() exactly for this purpose that puts the > _idle() call into a workqueue. If I'm in my CPU's idle path, I don't want to activate a workqueue because then I'll no longer be idle. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
