2009/5/7 Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@xxxxxxxxxxx>:> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Kevin Hilman> <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:>> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> writes:>>>>> On Wednesday 06 May 2009, Kevin Hilman wrote:>>>> Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:>>> There is at least one problem with that which is why Kyuwon Kim added>> the ->disable hook to OMAP's irq_chip. The problem is with drivers>> that call disable_irq() in their suspend hook, usually done to prevent>> the device from waking the system since on OMAP, any IRQ can be>> configured to wake the system.>>>> This does not sound correct. disable_irq_wake should be used for this.> A driver may need to mask its interrupt before suspending but this> should not also disable it as a wakeup source. I wish I could use disable_irq_wake(), but it doesn't work in OMAP. >> If a driver's suspend hook calls disable_irq() and the system is>> suspended before the lazy disable happens in the next handler, then>> the system will be suspended with that device's IRQ still enabled.>> Without an irq_chip->disable hook, that will result in that device IRQ>> waking up the system if it fires.>> The platform suspend code needs to write the wakeup mask into> interrupt controller the before entering suspend.> ditto > --> Arve Hjønnevåg> --> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/> -- Kyuwon (규원)_______________________________________________linux-pm mailing listlinux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
