From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> Add a document describing how IRQs are managed during system suspend and resume, how to set up a wakeup interrupt and what the IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag is supposed to be used for. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/power/suspend-and-interrupts.txt | 146 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 146 insertions(+) Index: linux-pm/Documentation/power/suspend-and-interrupts.txt =================================================================== --- /dev/null +++ linux-pm/Documentation/power/suspend-and-interrupts.txt @@ -0,0 +1,146 @@ +System Suspend and Device Interrupts + +Copyright (C) 2014 Intel Corp. +Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> + + +Suspending and Resuming Device IRQs +----------------------------------- + +Device interrupt request lines (IRQs) are generally disabled during system +suspend after the "late" phase of suspending devices (that is, after all of the +->prepare, ->suspend and ->suspend_late callbacks have been executed for all +devices). That is done by suspend_device_irqs(). + +The rationale for doing so is that after the "late" phase of device suspend +there is no legitimate reason why any interrupts from suspended devices should +trigger and if any devices have not been suspended properly yet, it is better to +block interrupts from them anyway. Also, in the past we had problems with +interrupt handlers for shared IRQs that device drivers implementing them were +not prepared for interrupts triggering after their devices had been suspended. +In some cases they would attempt to access, for example, memory address spaces +of suspended devices and cause unpredictable behavior to ensue as a result. +Unfortunately, such problems are very difficult to debug and the introduction +of suspend_device_irqs(), along with the "noirq" phase of device suspend and +resume, was the only practical way to mitigate them. + +Device IRQs are re-enabled during system resume, right before the "early" phase +of resuming devices (that is, before starting to execute ->resume_early +callbacks for devices). The function doing that is resume_device_irqs(). + + +The IRQF_NO_SUSPEND Flag +------------------------ + +There are interrupts that can legitimately trigger during the entire system +suspend-resume cycle, including the "noirq" phases of suspending and resuming +devices as well as during the time when nonboot CPUs are taken offline and +brought back online. That applies to timer interrupts in the first place, +but also to IPIs and to some other special-purpose interrupts, such as the ACPI +SCI that isn't associated with any specific device and is used for signaling +many different types of events. + +The IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag is used to indicate that to the IRQ subsystem when +requesting a special-purpose interrupt. It causes suspend_device_irqs() to +leave the corresponding IRQ enabled so as to allow the interrupt to work all +the time as expected. + +The IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag should not be used when requesting interrupts that +subsequently will be configured for waking up the system from sleep states +via enable_irq_wake() (that is, system wakeup interrupts). + + +System Wakeup Interrupts, enable_irq_wake() and disable_irq_wake() +------------------------------------------------------------------ + +System wakeup interrupts generally need to be configured to wake up the system +from sleep states, especially if they are used for different purposes (e.g. as +I/O interrupts) in the working state. + +That may involve turning on a special signal handling logic within the platform +(such as an SoC) so that signals from a given line are routed in a different way +during system sleep so as to trigger a system wakeup when needed. For example, +the platform may include a dedicated interrupt controller used specifically for +handling system wakeup events. Then, if a given interrupt line is supposed to +wake up the system from sleep sates, the corresponding input of that interrupt +controller needs to be enabled to receive signals from the line in question. +After wakeup, it generally is better to disable that input to prevent the +dedicated controller from triggering interrupts unnecessarily. + +The IRQ subsystem provides two helper functions to be used by device drivers for +those purposes. Namely, enable_irq_wake() turns on the platform's logic for +handling the given IRQ as a system wakeup interrupt line and disable_irq_wake() +turns that logic off. + +Calling enable_irq_wake() doesn't prevent the working-state logic for handling +the given IRQ from being disabled by suspend_device_irqs(), so after the "late" +phase of suspending devices the IRQ can only be expected to work as a system +wakeup interrupt line. The IRQ subsystem checks if there are any pending +interrupts on those lines by calling check_wakeup_irqs() at the last (syscore) +stage of full system suspend. If there are any, it aborts the system suspend +by returning -EBUSY from that function. It does not, however, invoke any +interrupt handlers for system wakeup IRQs after suspend_device_irqs(). + + +System Wakeup Interrupts and Suspend-to-Idle +-------------------------------------------- + +Suspend-to-idle (also known as the "freeze" sleep state) is a relatively new +system sleep state that works by idling all of the processors and waiting for +interrupts right after the "noirq" phase of suspending devices. + +Of course, this means that all of the interrupts with the IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag +set will bring CPUs out of idle while in that state, but they will not cause the +IRQ subsystem to trigger a system wakeup. + +System wakeup interrupts, in turn, are generally expected to trigger wakeup from +system sleep states, including suspend-to-idle. For this reason, all of the +IRQs configured for system wakeup with enable_irq_wake(), previously disabled +by suspend_device_irqs(), are re-enabled right before starting the final "go to +an idle state and wait for an interrupt" loop of suspend-to-idle. However, they +are also reconfigured so that the original handlers associated with them will +not be invoked at that time. Those interrupt handlers are all temporarily +substituted for by a special "wakeup mode" interrupt handler that disables the +IRQ, marks it as "suspended" and pending and triggers a suspend-to-idle wakeup +event. + +The rationale here is to keep the behavior consistent with the existing way of +handling wakeup interrupts during full system suspends, which is that + + (a) interrupt handlers are not executed for them after suspend_device_irqs() + +and + + (b) full system suspends are aborted if an interrupt from a wakeup IRQ line is + received after suspend_device_irqs(). + +Combined with the requirement that system wakeup interrupts wake up the system +from suspend-to-idle, (a) and (b) imply that interrupt handlers should not be +invoked for wakeup interrupts in suspend-to-idle, although those interrupts +should still wake up the system from that state. The IRQs that triggered wakeup +also need to be marked as pending to avoid losing wakeup events. + +When wakeup from suspend-to-idle is triggered, the wakeup IRQs are disabled +again and their original interrupt handlers are restored. They are subsequently +re-enabled by resume_device_irqs(), as usual. + + +IRQF_NO_SUSPEND and enable_irq_wake() +------------------------------------- + +There are no valid reasons to use both enable_irq_wake() and the IRQF_NO_SUSPEND +flag on the same IRQ. + +First of all, if the IRQ is not shared, the rules for handling IRQF_NO_SUSPEND +interrupts (interrupt handlers are invoked after suspend_device_irqs()) are +directly at odds with the rules for handling system wakeup interrupts (interrupt +handlers are not invoked after suspend_device_irqs()). + +Secondly, enable_irq_wake() applies to entire IRQs and not to individual +interrupt handlers, so sharing an IRQ between a system wakeup interrupt source +and an IRQF_NO_SUSPEND interrupt source does not make sense in principle. If +attempted, it leads to situations in which genuine wakeup interrups are lost, +because they are regarded as interrupts from the IRQF_NO_SUSPEND interrupt +source, or are reported as unhandled interrupts, depending on the implementation +of the interrupt handler for that source, the timing of events and other +factors. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
