Re: [PATCH 0/5] irq / PM: Shared IRQs vs IRQF_NO_SUSPEND and suspend-to-idle wakeup

2014-08-07 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, August 05, 2014 05:22:57 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, August 01, 2014 04:29:40 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, August 01, 2014 03:43:21 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > OK, I guess "IRQ_HANDLED from a wakeup inte

Re: [PATCH 0/5] irq / PM: Shared IRQs vs IRQF_NO_SUSPEND and suspend-to-idle wakeup

2014-08-05 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 05:22:57PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Here's a patch series based on what we talked about. > > [1/5] Mechanism to wake up the system or abort suspend in progress > automatically. > [2/5] Fix for shared IRQs vs IRQF_NO_SUSPEND (with wakeup in mind). > [3/5] Wakeup in

[PATCH 0/5] irq / PM: Shared IRQs vs IRQF_NO_SUSPEND and suspend-to-idle wakeup

2014-08-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Friday, August 01, 2014 04:29:40 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, August 01, 2014 03:43:21 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > OK, I guess "IRQ_HANDLED from a wakeup interrupt" may be interpreted as > > > IRQ_HANDLED_PMWAKE. On the other hand