On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, NeilBrown wrote:
>
> The IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND flag seems to be hard to use correctly, so either
> I'm understanding it wrongly, or it could be made easier to use.
> If the first case, I'm hoping that some improvement to documentation might
> result. If the second, then maybe we can fix the code.
...
> Is anyone able to give a definitive answer on this? Should
> IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND be removed?
The whole point of IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND is to deal with hardware
designed by geniuses.
Most SoCs have a way to mark the interrupts which serve as a wake up
source as such. All other interrupts are magically "masked" on entry
to suspend.
Now there is hardware which is missing such a control, so we need to
mask the non wakeup interrupts right before going into suspend.
That's what IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND does. Not more, not less. See
commit d209a699a0b for more ugly details.
You might be looking for a different functionality. Can you explain
what you need?
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
