From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86-64: software IRQ masking and handling
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:39:05 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201008041139.06739.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C588C0C.1070702@goop.org>
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 07:07:16 am Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Of course if it becomes core to the x86 architecture or the kernel
> overall, then most of the irq-related paravirt-ops can go away and be
> limited to the actual interrupt handler and the machinery needed to
> really mask/unmask the hardware and set the pending flag (which would
> likely just be contained within the hypervisor-specific code, and not
> need any new kernel interfaces to replace the dropped paravirt irq ones).
Yep, we sweat over the cli/sti paravirtual implementations because it's so
common. If the kernel used soft cli/sti we could simply implement it with
a hypercall and be much happier (though iret possibly still an issue).
Cheers,
Rusty.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-04 2:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-11 18:01 [RFC PATCH] x86-64: software IRQ masking and handling Tejun Heo
2010-07-11 19:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-07-11 20:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-11 22:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-07-12 1:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-12 5:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-07-12 8:02 ` Rusty Russell
2010-07-12 7:41 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 2:19 ` Rusty Russell
2010-07-12 2:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-12 7:45 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 7:35 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 13:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-08-03 21:37 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-08-04 2:09 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201008041139.06739.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.