On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, NeilBrown wrote: > > The IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND flag seems to be hard to use correctly, so either > I'm understanding it wrongly, or it could be made easier to use. > If the first case, I'm hoping that some improvement to documentation might > result. If the second, then maybe we can fix the code. ... > Is anyone able to give a definitive answer on this? Should > IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND be removed? The whole point of IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND is to deal with hardware designed by geniuses. Most SoCs have a way to mark the interrupts which serve as a wake up source as such. All other interrupts are magically "masked" on entry to suspend. Now there is hardware which is missing such a control, so we need to mask the non wakeup interrupts right before going into suspend. That's what IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND does. Not more, not less. See commit d209a699a0b for more ugly details. You might be looking for a different functionality. Can you explain what you need? Thanks, tglx -- 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
