According to commit 9c6079aa1bf(genirq: Do not consider disabled wakeup irqs), we should not break the suspend when one irq is pending but has been disabled before suspending.
But there is another case missed, that one irq with flag IRQF_NO_SUSPEND, which has been disabled before suspending, and irq pending there, in this case, we still should not break the suspending, otherwise, the suspend abort over and over. Here also checking if the desc->istate & IRQS_SUSPENDED is true. Signed-off-by: liu chuansheng <[email protected]> --- kernel/irq/pm.c | 3 ++- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/irq/pm.c b/kernel/irq/pm.c index cb228bf..1470c1b 100644 --- a/kernel/irq/pm.c +++ b/kernel/irq/pm.c @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ int check_wakeup_irqs(void) * can abort suspend. */ if (irqd_is_wakeup_set(&desc->irq_data)) { - if (desc->depth == 1 && desc->istate & IRQS_PENDING) + if (desc->depth == 1 && (desc->istate & IRQS_PENDING) + && (desc->istate & IRQS_SUSPENDED)) return -EBUSY; continue; } -- 1.7.0.4 -- 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/
