From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arve_Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] PM: Rework handling of interrupts during suspend-resume Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:13:27 -0800 Message-ID: References: <200902221837.49396.rjw@sisk.pl> <20090226030050.GA3361@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge , LKML , Jesse Barnes , Thomas Gleixner , "Eric W. Biederman" , Ingo Molnar , pm list List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Arve Hj=F8nnev=E5g wrote: >> >> I don't think this is a oddball case. It is very common to connect >> keys or keypads to gpios. If these keys are wakeup keys, it is not OK >> to loose interrupts during the suspend phase. > > .. and how many drivers is that? Is it one or two "gpio input drivers" or > is it a hundred? > > The "common" is not so much about "how many machines", but "in how many > drivers would you actually do this". We only have one gpio input driver, but I don't think is good to loose any wakeup interrupts. Any driver that needs an edge triggered wakeup interrupt will have problems if the hardware does not regenerate the interrupt when the host does not respond. It is not hard to work around this problem in the platform specific interrupt code, but I think it is a generic problem worth fixing for every platform. -- = Arve Hj=F8nnev=E5g