Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 09:55:13 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Ning Jiang <ning.n.jiang@gmail.com>
cc: rjw@sisk.pl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: add IRQS_PENDING for nested, simple and level handler to early
 abort suspend operation
In-Reply-To: <CAH3Oq6Rhqr+cZmYPCOhHqOP=B60zw_GRFDCkOTjEr9wp9NtFmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1205180950400.3231@ionos>
References: <CAH3Oq6Rhqr+cZmYPCOhHqOP=B60zw_GRFDCkOTjEr9wp9NtFmA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1122
Lines: 28

On Fri, 18 May 2012, Ning Jiang wrote:

> During suspend check_wakeup_irqs() will check IRQS_PENDING flag to
> abort a suspend operation, however, this only applies for edge
> triggered irq. Add IRQS_PENDING for nested, simple and level handler
> to mimic the same behaviour as edge irq handler.
> 
> Without this optimization, level irq can be handled correctly but there
> is some penalty. It has to go through a full run/suspend power cycle for level
> irq to be detected and handled. With it, we can abort the suspend operation
> earlier and thus shorten the interrupt latency.
> 
> I know this is ugly as IRQS_PENDING is intended for edge irq but I don't
> know how to do it in a right way. Please enlighten me if you have better ideas.

First of all, please send patches inlined. Aside of that a similar
patch is queued in tip/irq/core commit d4dc0f90.

Thanks,

	tglx


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/