On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 19:46 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Lyude Paul wrote:
>
> > I think you are right, apologies. Glad to know this isn't a regression in
> > the
> > IRQ handling code :). It looks like our nouveau problems are probably coming
> > from the fact that we don't just leave IRQs setup through suspend/resume
> > which
> > as far as I can tell, is probably not the correct thing to do.
>
> If you tear down the interrupt, then you have to make sure that it's
> completely masked and disabled on the device side (including MSI).
Does this only need to be done if we handle irq_request()/irq_free() ourselves,
or can we skip some of these steps if we let the kernel handle
disabling/enabling IRQs during s/r?
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
