On Thu, 11 Sep 2025 11:27:04 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sun, 2025-08-10 at 13:51 +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > > void um_idle_sleep(void) > > { > > - if (time_travel_mode != TT_MODE_OFF) > > + if (time_travel_mode != TT_MODE_OFF) { > > time_travel_sleep(); > > - else > > + } else { > > + raw_local_irq_enable(); > > os_idle_sleep(); > > + raw_local_irq_disable(); > > + } > > This seems wrong, with it, lockdep gets really unhappy, and if I remove > this change it seems to work OK? > > I'll note that arch_cpu_idle() for x86 also doesn't change anything with > interrupts.
Thanks for catching that! I missed it. I'll take a closer look. Regards, Tiwei