lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Subject[PATCH 2/3] genirq: Do not consider the irqs with disabling and IRQF_NO_SUSPEND
From
Date

According to commit 9c6079aa1bf(genirq: Do not consider disabled
wakeup irqs), we should not break the suspend when one irq is pending
but has been disabled before suspending.

But there is another case missed, that one irq with flag IRQF_NO_SUSPEND,
which has been disabled before suspending, and irq pending there,
in this case, we still should not break the suspending, otherwise,
the suspend abort over and over.

Here also checking if the desc->istate & IRQS_SUSPENDED is true.

Signed-off-by: liu chuansheng <chuansheng.liu@intel.com>
---
kernel/irq/pm.c | 3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/pm.c b/kernel/irq/pm.c
index cb228bf..1470c1b 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/pm.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/pm.c
@@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ int check_wakeup_irqs(void)
* can abort suspend.
*/
if (irqd_is_wakeup_set(&desc->irq_data)) {
- if (desc->depth == 1 && desc->istate & IRQS_PENDING)
+ if (desc->depth == 1 && (desc->istate & IRQS_PENDING)
+ && (desc->istate & IRQS_SUSPENDED))
return -EBUSY;
continue;
}
--
1.7.0.4




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-03-11 10:21    [W:0.067 / U:0.172 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site