Shaohua Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > In general, I think that calling free_irq is the right behavior. > > Although irqs changing after suspend is rare, there are also some > > more serious issues. This has been discussed in the past, and a > > summary is as follows: > > irqs actually isn't changed after suspend currently, it's a considering > for future usage like hotplug. > Calling free_irq actually isn't a complete ACPI issue, but ACPI requires > it to solve nasty 'sleep in atomic' warning.
Is that the only problem? If so, then surely we can make free_irq() run happily with interrupts disabled: unlink the IRQ handler synchronously, defer the /proc teardown or something like that. > You will find such break > with swsusp without ACPI. Could we revert the ACPI change in Linus's > tree but keep it in -mm tree? So we get a chance to fix drivers. That depends on the amount of brokenness involved: if it's significant then I'll get a ton of bug reports concerning something which we already know is broken and we'll drive away our long-suffering testers. - 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/
