All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Oren Twaig <oren@scalemp.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Shai Fultheim <shai@scalemp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] X86: Hook apic vector allocation domain only when interrupt routing are set to ignore
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 13:50:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140427115036.GA22116@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <535CA9F6.7010101@scalemp.com>


* Oren Twaig <oren@scalemp.com> wrote:

> Hi Ingo,
> 
> On 04/26/2014 09:09 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > I still don't see a clear explanation of what the _user_ saw and sees
> > before and after the change. What is the effect of the patch: correct
> > IRQ routing (i.e. before the change IRQs would end up on the wrong
> > CPU), lower overhead IRQ routing (i.e. before the change IRQ routing
> > overhead was more expensive), or something else?
> >
> > You don't spell this out clearly and it's a crucial piece of
> > information that comes before every other explanation.
> >
> I see.. I tried to explain the entire flow and that was confusing - I'll explain
> only the patch.
> 
> As you stated, in general, the patch corrects IRQ routing in case a vSMP
> Foundation box is detected but the Interrupt Routing Comply (IRC) is set to
> "comply".
> 
> Before the patch:
> When a vSMP Foundation box was detected and IRC was set to "comply", users (and
> kernel) couldn't effectively set the destination of the IRQs. This is because
> the hook inside vsmp_64.c always setup all CPUs as the IRQ destination using
> cpumask_setall() as the return value for IRQ allocation mask. Later, this
> "overrided" mask caused the kernel to set the IRQ destination to the lowest
> online CPU in the mask (CPU0 usually).
> 
> After the patch:
> When the IRC is set to "comply", Users (and kernel) can control the destination
> of the IRQs as we will not be changing the default
> "apic->vector_allocation_domain".

Much better, thanks!

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-27 11:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-24 21:52 [PATCH v2] X86: Hook apic vector allocation domain only when interrupt routing are set to ignore Oren Twaig
2014-04-25  8:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-04-25 11:08   ` Oren Twaig
2014-04-26  6:09     ` Ingo Molnar
2014-04-27  6:55       ` Oren Twaig
2014-04-27 11:50         ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2014-04-25 14:22 ` Andi Kleen
2014-04-27  6:57   ` Oren Twaig
2014-04-27 11:54     ` Ingo Molnar
2014-04-27 18:34     ` Andi Kleen
2014-04-28  7:06       ` Oren Twaig

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=20140427115036.GA22116@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oren@scalemp.com \
    --cc=shai@scalemp.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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.