From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> There is no reason why we should delay the masking of interrupts whose interrupt chip requests MASK_ON_SUSPEND to the point where we check the wakeup interrupts. We can do it right at the point where we mark the interrupt as suspended.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> --- kernel/irq/pm.c | 21 +++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) Index: linux/kernel/irq/pm.c =================================================================== --- linux.orig/kernel/irq/pm.c +++ linux/kernel/irq/pm.c @@ -56,6 +56,15 @@ static void suspend_device_irq(struct ir desc->istate |= IRQS_SUSPENDED; __disable_irq(desc, irq); + + /* + * Hardware which has no wakeup source configuration facility + * requires that the non wakeup interrupts are masked at the + * chip level. The chip implementation indicates that with + * IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND. + */ + if (irq_desc_get_chip(desc)->flags & IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND) + mask_irq(desc); } /** @@ -176,19 +185,7 @@ int check_wakeup_irqs(void) if (irqd_is_wakeup_set(&desc->irq_data)) { if (desc->depth == 1 && desc->istate & IRQS_PENDING) return -EBUSY; - continue; } - /* - * Check the non wakeup interrupts whether they need - * to be masked before finally going into suspend - * state. That's for hardware which has no wakeup - * source configuration facility. The chip - * implementation indicates that with - * IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND. - */ - if (desc->istate & IRQS_SUSPENDED && - irq_desc_get_chip(desc)->flags & IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND) - mask_irq(desc); } return 0; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
