From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 for-xen-4.5 2/2] dpci: Replace tasklet
 with an softirq (v8)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:36:50 -0400
Message-ID: <20141027163650.GB11893@laptop.dumpdata.com>
References: <1413911967-26886-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
	<1413911967-26886-3-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
	<5448E82702000078000415B5@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<20141024015858.GB28850@laptop.dumpdata.com>
	<544A41970200007800041D63@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<20141024205544.GA19814@laptop.dumpdata.com>
	<20141025003911.GA2919@laptop.dumpdata.com>
	<544E20140200007800042527@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>) id 1XinHw-000095-D3
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:37:00 +0000
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <544E20140200007800042527@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: keir@xen.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, tim@xen.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 09:36:04AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 25.10.14 at 02:39, <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> > We can stick the 'quisce' part at the end of 'pt_pirq_destroy_bind' or
> > at the start of 'pt_irq_create_bind'. And the only way I can think of doing
> > this quisce is:
> > 
> >      if ( pt_pirq_softirq_active(pirq_dpci) )
> >      {
> >          spin_unlock(&d->event_lock);
> > -        ASSERT_NOT_IN_ATOMIC();
> > -        process_pending_softirqs();
> > +        cpu_relax();
> >          goto restart;
> >      }
> > 
> > Which would replicate what a 'tasklet_kill' does.
> 
> Ah, right, it was you who added the process_pending_softirqs()
> despite tasklet_kill() not having it. With the comment referring to

Yes. I was trying to be clever.

> tasklet_kill()'s behavior I think this is fine to be done as you
> suggest above.
> 
> Jan
>