Quoting Matthias Kaehlcke (2018-04-12 14:41:02)
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 01:38:34PM -0600, Karthikeyan Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > @@ -1103,6 +1107,14 @@ static int __maybe_unused qcom_geni_serial_sys_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
> >
> > if (console_suspend_enabled && uport->suspended) {
> > uart_resume_port(uport->private_data, uport);
> > + /*
> > + * uart_suspend_port() invokes port shutdown which in turn
> > + * frees the irq. uart_resume_port invokes port startup which
> > + * performs request_irq. The request_irq auto-enables the IRQ.
> > + * In addition, resume_noirq implicitly enables the IRQ and
> > + * leads to an unbalanced IRQ enable warning. Disable the IRQ
> > + * before returning so that the warning is suppressed.
> > + */
>
> For the record, the noirq flow is:
>
> dpm_resume_noirq()
> dpm_noirq_resume_devices()
> for each dev
> device_resume_noirq()
>
> dpm_noirq_end()
> resume_irqs()
> for_each_irq_desc
> resume_irq()
>
>
I'm still curious why we use the noirq variants of the suspend/resume
hooks. Why not use the normal suspend/resume hooks here and then drop
the whole disable_irq() dance?
> > disable_irq(uport->irq);
> > }
> > return 0;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
