On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 02:02 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Well, this seems to be more natural ("if you want to do something before/after
> disabling the IRQs, define it" instead of "you can do something instead of
> calling local_irq_save(), but please remember to disable the IRQs yourself
> in that case").
Heh. Yeah, I guess. It just didn't seem worth it. I personally don't
care, I just need to be able to get at those spots.
> BTW, it need not be in pm_ops (actually, why should it be there?).
> Alternatively, you can define something like arch_prepare_for_disabling_irqs()
> and/or arch_prepare_device_power_down() that will be empty on x86, for
> example.
Not sure, it might be different for different suspend methods. We
actually need to do some platform-function stuff inbetween, and if we
ever want some S4-like state then we might need to do it differently.
> BTW2, I think BUG_ON(irqs_enabled) is needed after the arch does something
> instead of or after local_irq_save().
Sure, I can add that. Probably also in the resume path.
johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
