From: Thomas Gleixner <email@example.com> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <email@example.com>, Linux PM list <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <email@example.com>, Linux PCI <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Dmitry Torokhov <email@example.com>, Aubrey Li <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 v3] irq / PM: Suspend-to-idle wakeup interrupts Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 03:09:34 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview] Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1408290256020.23342@nanos> (raw) In-Reply-To: <14849230.M7591XGLg0@vostro.rjw.lan> On Fri, 29 Aug 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, August 29, 2014 12:44:11 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > So really, I'm too lazy to walk through that mess further. I bet NONE > > of the usage sites except those for which this has been introduced in > > the first place has a real good reason to do so. > > A quite similar conclusion occured to me earlier today independently, > so we seem to be in agreement here. :-) I appreciate that! > > Unless someone comes up with a use case where a shared NO_SUSPEND > > handler is absolutely required, there is nothing which needs to be > > addressed. You've proven yourself, that the wake mechanism is > > sufficient to solve the problem which led to this discussion. > > Yeah, that particular thing can be perfectly addressed without using > IRQF_NO_SUSPEND. > > There seems to be quite some confusion about that in the ARM world, > though, as IRQF_NO_SUSPEND things *happen* to wake the system up if WFI is > used to emulate "suspend" and that appears to make people believe that using > them for this purpose is actually fine (because that appears to work). Well, the problem in the ARM world is still the same as we had 10 years ago, just a bit different. While 10 years ago, the "make it work for me" attitude was hidden in some vendor tree and stayed there forever, today its still the same "make it work for me" thing which gets applied to the vendor tree (they still sport 1000+ patches despite all efforts) and then trickles into the mainline w/o much review to fulfil the "we need to be mainline" mantra. > That said I was not involved in the introduction of IRQF_EARLY_RESUME (or > at least I can't recall being involved) and I also can't recall having used > it for anything, so I can't really say what the original motivation was. It was solely introduced to solve an oddball issue with the XEN "IPIs" and I take the blame for not documenting it proper. Though I really have a hard time to understand why random drivers use this w/o comment and for no obvious reason. "Works for me" looks like a reasonable explanation. I've uploaded an incomplete and completely untested patch series to handle this stuff to: https://tglx.de/~tglx/patches.tar Feel free to pick it up and work from there. Thanks, tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-29 1:09 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2014-08-11 13:56 [PATCH 0/6 v2] irq / PM: Shared IRQs vs IRQF_NO_SUSPEND and suspend-to-idle " Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-11 13:58 ` [PATCH 1/6 v2] PM / sleep: Mechanism for aborting system suspends unconditionally Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-11 13:59 ` [PATCH 2/6 v2] irq / PM: Make IRQF_NO_SUSPEND work with shared interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-11 14:00 ` [PATCH 3/6 v2] irq / PM: Make wakeup interrupts work with suspend-to-idle Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-11 14:01 ` [PATCH 4/6 v2] x86 / PM: Set IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE for IOAPIC IRQ chip objects Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-11 14:02 ` [PATCH 5/6 v2] PCI / PM: Make PCIe PME interrupts wake up from suspend-to-idle Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-11 14:03 ` [PATCH 6/6 v2] irq / PM: Document rules related to system suspend and interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-26 23:46 ` [PATCH 0/5 v3] irq / PM: Suspend-to-idle wakeup interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-26 23:47 ` [PATCH 1/5 v3] PM / sleep: Mechanism for aborting system suspends unconditionally Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-26 23:49 ` [PATCH 2/5 v3] irq / PM: Make wakeup interrupts work with suspend-to-idle Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-27 20:32 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-08-27 22:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-28 9:23 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-08-29 1:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-26 23:50 ` [PATCH 3/5 v3] x86 / PM: Set IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE for IOAPIC IRQ chip objects Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-26 23:51 ` [PATCH 4/5 v3] PCI / PM: Make PCIe PME interrupts wake up from suspend-to-idle Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-26 23:52 ` [PATCH 5/5 v3] irq / PM: Document rules related to system suspend and interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-28 22:44 ` [PATCH 0/5 v3] irq / PM: Suspend-to-idle wakeup interrupts Thomas Gleixner 2014-08-29 0:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-08-29 1:09 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message] 2014-09-01 14:18 ` [PATCH 00/13] genirq / PM: Wakeup interrupts handling rework (related to suspend-to-idle) Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:19 ` [PATCH 01/13] PM / sleep: Mechanism for aborting system suspends unconditionally Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:20 ` [PATCH 02/13] genirq: Move suspend/resume logic into irq/pm code Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:21 ` [PATCH 03/13] genirq: Add sanity checks for PM options on shared interrupt lines Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:22 ` [PATCH 04/13] genirq: Make use of pm misfeature accounting Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:22 ` [PATCH 05/13] genirq: Move MASK_ON_SUSPEND handling into suspend_device_irqs() Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:23 ` [PATCH 06/13] genirq: Avoid double loop on suspend Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:24 ` [PATCH 07/13] genirq: Distangle edge handler entry Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:24 ` [PATCH 08/13] genirq: Create helper for flow handler entry check Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:26 ` [PATCH 09/13] genirq: Mark wakeup sources as armed on suspend Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:27 ` [PATCH 10/13] genirq: Simplify wakeup mechanism Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:28 ` [PATCH 11/13] x86 / PM: Set IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE for IOAPIC IRQ chip objects Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:28 ` [PATCH 12/13] PCI / PM: Make PCIe PME interrupts wake up from suspend-to-idle Rafael J. Wysocki 2014-09-01 14:29 ` [PATCH 13/13] PM / genirq: Document rules related to system suspend and interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.10.1408290256020.23342@nanos \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 0/5 v3] irq / PM: Suspend-to-idle wakeup interrupts' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).