[linux-pm] [RFC][PATCH 2/2] PM: Rework handling of interrupts during suspend-resume

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw at sisk.pl> wrote:

> On Wednesday 25 February 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw at sisk.pl> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tuesday 24 February 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The only safe way on x86 to shutdown a level triggered ioapic irq
> > > > > > outside of irq context is for the driver to program the hardware to
> > > > > > not generate an irq.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Well, that changes things quite a bit, because it means we can't change the
> > > > > suspend-resume sequence in a way we thought we could without fixing all
> > > > > drivers first, but this is exactly what we'd like to avoid by changing the
> > > > > core.
> > > > 
> > > > Calling "disable_irq()" is perfectly fine.
> > > > 
> > > > What is not possible on that broken IO-APIC (among other 
> > > > things) is to actually turn the interrupts off at the apic 
> > > > (ie the whole ->shutdown() thing). But that's not what we 
> > > > even want to do. What we care about is just disabling the 
> > > > interrupt from a drievr perspective.
> > > > 
> > > > IOW, the patches I have seen are fine, and all the comments 
> > > > from Eric are just confusion about what we want done.
> > > 
> > > Ah, OK.  Thanks for the explanation, I got confused too.
> > > 
> > > > WE DO NOT WANT TO TURN OFF THE IO-APIC. That may or may 
> > > > happen later, but that's totally unrelated to this whole 
> > > > "suspend_device_irq()" thing.
> > > 
> > > Yeah.
> > 
> > We definitely dont want to turn off x86 IO-APICs - the timer IRQ 
> > goes via one of them.
> 
> No, we don't.  At least not at this point.
> 
> BTW, appended is the current (3rd) version of the $subject patch with some
> of your comments taken into account.  In particular, I did the following:
> - moved [suspend|resume]_device_irqs() to a separate file (pm.c)
> - fixed interrupt.h so that their headers are at a better place
> - made enable_irq() clear IRQ_SUSPENDED
> - made device_power_down() and device_power_up() call
>   suspend_device_irqs() and resume_device_irqs(), respectively, which
>   simplified the callers quite a bit (it changed the Xen code ordering, though,
>   but I _think_ it still should work).
> 
> Please have a look.

Looks good, thanks Rafael!

Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo at elte.hu>

	Ingo