On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:09:47PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> But sure, we can add suspend notifiers to stuff to shut down timers; I
> should have a patch for at least one of the offenders somewhere. But I
> really think that we should not be looking at the individual timers for
> this, none of the other suspend modes care about active timers.
Fair enough.
> > But before we do that we want a proper explanation why the interrupt
> > fires at all. The lack of explanation cleary documents that this is a
> > 'hacked it into submission' approach.
>
> >From what I remember its the waking interrupt that ends up in the
> timekeeping code, Li should have a backtrace somwhere.
I can imagine what happens :)
> > stomp_machine() is in 99% of all use cases a clear indicator for a
> > complete design failure.
>
> > So the generic idle task needs a check like this:
> >
> > if (idle_should_freeze())
> > frozen_idle();
>
> So that is adding extra code to fairly common/hot paths just for this
> one extra special case. I tried to avoid doing that.
idle enter is not that much of a hot path, really.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
