Re: [RFC] irqchip: gic: always mask interrupts during suspend
From: Brian Norris
Date: Tue Jun 10 2014 - 19:48:38 EST
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 01:34:39AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Brian Norris wrote:
> > Other random thought: it seems like any irqchip driver which does lazy IRQ
> > masking ought to use IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND. So maybe the IRQ core should just
> > do something like:
> >
> > if (!chip->irq_disable)
> > chip->flags |= IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND;
>
> No. Lazy irq disable and the suspend logic are different beasts.
OK, fair enough. Drop that random thought then. It's not in the patch
content anyway.
> That's up to the platform to decide this. Just for the record: there
> is a world outside of ARM...
OK. But GIC is ARM-specific, so we can still constrain this patch and
related topics to the world of ARM.
> But that brings me to a different question:
>
> Why are you not putting that customization into the device tree
> instead of trying to add this to some random arch/arm/mach-foo
> files?
I'm not adding customization to arch/arm/mach-foo files. I'm trying to
remove it.
This property could be added to device tree, if there was really a valid
use case for a GIC which leaves its interrupts unmasked for suspend. My
question in this patch is essentially: does such a use case exist?
Brian
--
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/