[PATCH 1/3] Powerpc: mpc85xx: refactor the PM operations
Chenhui Zhao
chenhui.zhao at freescale.com
Thu Aug 6 15:54:26 AEST 2015
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-08-06 at 12:20 +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Scott Wood
>> <scottwood at freescale.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 18:11 +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
>> > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Scott Wood
>> <scottwood at freescale.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 19:32 +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Scott Wood
>> > > <scottwood at freescale.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Could you explain irq_mask()? Why would there still be
>> IRQs
>> > > > > destined
>> > > > > > for
>> > > > > > this CPU at this point?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > This function just masks irq by setting the registers in
>> RCPM
>> > > (for
>> > > > > example, RCPM_CPMIMR, RCPM_CPMCIMR). Actually, all irqs to
>> > > this CPU
>> > > > > have been migrated to other CPUs.
>> > > >
>> > > > So why do we need to set those bits in RCPM? Is it just
>> caution?
>> > >
>> > > Setting these bits can mask interrupts signalled to RCPM from
>> MPIC
>> > > as a
>> > > means of
>> > > waking up from a lower power state. So, cores will not be
>> waked up
>> > > unexpectedly.
>> >
>> > Why would the MPIC be signalling those interrupts if they've been
>> > masked at
>> > the MPIC?
>> >
>> > -Scott
>> >
>>
>> The interrupts to RCPM from MPIC are IRQ, Machine Check, NMI and
>> Critical interrupts. Some of them didn't be masked in MPIC.
>
> What interrupt could actually happen to a sleeping cpu that this
> protects
> against?
>
> -Scott
Not sure. Maybe spurious interrupts or hardware exceptions. However,
setting them make sure dead cpus can not be waked up unexpectedly.
-Chenhui
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list