On Monday, September 27, 2010, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > How about adding another flag to the dev_pm_info structure, to indicate > > > that the runtime callbacks may be called in interrupt context? > > > > > > Maybe that will lead to problems I haven't thought of. But if it seems > > > okay to you, I can code it up easily enough. > > > > Hmm. I was thinking about adding a new RPM_ flag for that, like > > RPM_FASTPATH, > > telling the PM core to assume the callbacks will not sleep and that the call > > might be from interrupt handler. > > That might appear more flexible, but is there any advantage to it? > That is, would there be a situation where the driver knows that the > next callback won't sleep but in general the callback might sleep > sometimes? It doesn't seem very likely.
A flag in dev_pm_info, when set, would always make the PM core behave as though the call was made from interrupt context, even if it really wasn't, while the RPM_ flag would allow the driver to tell it to do that when it's really necessary. The driver always knows which calls are made from an interrupt handler. :-) Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
