Benjamin,
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> > >Benjamin just confirmed that. The logic in disable_device_interrupts()
> > >already skips interrupts marked with IRQF_TIMER, but I suspect that
> > >the hpet/MSI interupts are not marked that way.
> > >
> >
> > For percpu hpet at offline we will have
> > - clockevent shutdown which will disable the interrupt
> > - free_irq that will unregister on CPU DEAD
>
> Well, the interupt in question is on the boot cpu which is not going
> through CPU DEAD :)
can you please test the patch below.
Thanks,
tglx
------------>
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c b/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
index 81408b9..dedc2bd 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
@@ -510,7 +510,8 @@ static int hpet_setup_irq(struct hpet_dev *dev)
{
if (request_irq(dev->irq, hpet_interrupt_handler,
- IRQF_DISABLED|IRQF_NOBALANCING, dev->name, dev))
+ IRQF_TIMER | IRQF_DISABLED | IRQF_NOBALANCING,
+ dev->name, dev))
return -1;
disable_irq(dev->irq);
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
