From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932504Ab1JCUf6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2011 16:35:58 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:53467 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932342Ab1JCUft (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2011 16:35:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 22:35:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Ian Campbell cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , xen-devel , linux-kernel , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: xen: IPI interrupts not resumed early enough on suspend/resume In-Reply-To: <1317668908.11991.20.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <1317654626.21903.72.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <1317668908.11991.20.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 19:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > I can see a few options for how I might go about solving this in a > > > non-hacky way, which approach do you think would be preferable: > > > > The question is whether you need to disable the IPI interrupt at > > all. If not, we have a flag for that. > > We already that flag for these (I think that was why it was added even). > The issue is that in the resuming domain on the other side event > channels all start off masked and something needs to unmask them. Bah. > > > * Add "IRQF_RESUME_EARLY", driven from syscore_resume, and use it > > > for these interrupts. > > > > That's the preferable solution, as we could use that for PPC as well, > > unless we can move stuff around, so we disable stuff later. > > OK I guess we should go down that road then. Thanks, tglx From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: xen: IPI interrupts not resumed early enough on suspend/resume Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 22:35:45 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <1317654626.21903.72.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <1317668908.11991.20.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1317668908.11991.20.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Campbell Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , xen-devel , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 19:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > I can see a few options for how I might go about solving this in a > > > non-hacky way, which approach do you think would be preferable: > > > > The question is whether you need to disable the IPI interrupt at > > all. If not, we have a flag for that. > > We already that flag for these (I think that was why it was added even). > The issue is that in the resuming domain on the other side event > channels all start off masked and something needs to unmask them. Bah. > > > * Add "IRQF_RESUME_EARLY", driven from syscore_resume, and use it > > > for these interrupts. > > > > That's the preferable solution, as we could use that for PPC as well, > > unless we can move stuff around, so we disable stuff later. > > OK I guess we should go down that road then. Thanks, tglx