Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq_work

[Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>]

On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:58 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:42:11PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:20 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Ok so going back to the original self-irq patchkit. Unfortunately the other
> > > reviewer hated that. How to get out of that deadlock?
> > 
> > Well, I didn't like your original patch either.
> > 
> > What's wrong with going with the patch I posted today? (aside from me
> > getting the barriers slightly wrong and not doing the arch
> > implementation).
> 
> Well it would need to work.

Look at kernel/perf_event.c:perf_pending_queue()/__perf_pending_run()

> Also I personally didn't see the point of the irq items list because
> there's no good way to dynamically allocate it in a NMI, so the window
> would be always "fixed size" anyways and you could as well just use 
> per cpu data.
> 
> That's why for simple self irq I preferred Ying's original patch.

I already told you that I have an irq_work in every perf_event structure
(its called perf_pending_entry), I cannot register an id for each
perf_event because:
  1) there's potentially more than 32 of them
  2) I'd need an id->perf_event map which is a waste of time