Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 08:40:35 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: "dbasehore ." <dbasehore@chromium.org>
cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Rajneesh Bhardwaj <rajneesh.bhardwaj@intel.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] tick: Add freeze timer events
In-Reply-To: <CAGAzgsqhV=e8ZuwA7NtOX_tg+HfQfYGg6oTTTRa2bp-LBOZ54w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1707180838570.1945@nanos>
References: <20170708000303.21863-1-dbasehore@chromium.org> <CAJZ5v0horA+vgR3bAbEu+AiqEFJ7JyZ49nTv6FBPHRvmXOUFpQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAGAzgsoFugSw=UQsJmep0woGg70J3nie0-EtvtQ4Ec1NG1usOg@mail.gmail.com> <7467728.lI8lN4PjS8@aspire.rjw.lan>
 <CAGAzgsq1c3HdMJ9801uqB+7USK9mqt9xtZTbH=EYv0KDLe+8=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJZ5v0jaHAExRdwwhJU9p+tDB1ESEXqgfU_DLXev0su3qZaNBA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGAzgsqhV=e8ZuwA7NtOX_tg+HfQfYGg6oTTTRa2bp-LBOZ54w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1105
Lines: 22

On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, dbasehore . wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 6:33 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> I could make a patch to try it out. I would probably add a flag to rtc
> timers to indicate whether it wakes the system (default true). We
> would have to add a sync with the rtc irq and the rtc irqwork. I would
> probably add a rtc_timer_sync function that would flush the rtc irq
> and flush the irqwork. I would call this after the freeze_ops sync
> function since the sci irq needs to finish before syncing with the rtc
> irq. Also, pm_wakeup_irq seems racy with the current implementation of
> s2idle_loop since the RTC irq could be mistakenly set as pm_wakeup_irq
> when something else actually triggered the full wakeup. Fortunately, I
> don't think pm_wakeup_irq is used for anything except debugging, but
> we might change that.

There is another option which you might consider. We can reserve one of the
HPET comparators for that purpose and have a special interrupt handler for
it. Checking the HPET for expiry from the low level code should be trivial.

Thanks,

	tglx