On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Still, if Linus agrees, I can put the loop suggested by him directly into > sysdev_suspend(). Linus? I don't much care - it's going to be a no-op on architectures that don't have that kind of "turn an interrupt into a wakeup event" capability. So it's not going to break for things like x86, and it's not like going over the irq list one more time is going to be so expensive as to be noticeable, even if that architecture doesn't ever get any advantage of it. However - my main worry is that we will notice that different architectures (and possibly even different platforms _within_ the same architecture - depending on which kind of interrupt/pm controller they have) will want to do different things, and actually do something to the interrupt controller itself too at that point. But we can certainly try starting out with just the generic "if a wakeup interrupt is pending, sysdev_suspend() returns an error immediately". Linus _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
