Re: [PATCH 1/10] PM: Rework handling of interrupts during suspend-resume(rev. 5)

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 March 2009, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(suspend_device_irqs);
> > 
> >   I'm not too enthusiastic about this open coded implementation of
> >   disable_irq() with slightly different semantics.
> 
> The difference in semantics is important IMO, otherwise I woulndn't have
> done that.  In particular, IMO, the condition should be under the spinlock IMO
> and I'd rather not synchronize all interrupts we don't really disable here.

I don't say that the difference is not relevant. But the code is
almost the same and disable_irq() could have the sync_irq optimization
as well.
 
> >   Can we please move the fiddling with desc->* into
> >   kernel/irq/manage.c and share the code there ?
> 
> Can you please discuss that with Ingo?  I moved that from manage.c at his
> request.

Hmrpf. Will do. I just want to avoid that we have scattered functions
which deal with the guts of the irq code all over the place. I'm fine
with your loop in irq/pm.c, but the actual handling of the irq
internals should remain in manage.c.

I'll have a closer look how to solve this.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/