From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq: remove IRQF_DISABLED
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 11:24:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1236335049.6326.114.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1236333543.7260.138.camel@pasglop>
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 20:59 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > If you have distinct interrupt priorities, you can
> >
> > 1) provide an interrupt stack for each priority
> > 2) mask all lower priorities when handling one
> >
> > Would that not work?
>
> The PIC does that already. IE. it will only interrupt again before
> ->eoi() for an interrupt of a higher priority. But by using
> IRQF_DISABLED, you mask interrupts in the core, and thus effectively
> completely prevents the whole thing.
>
> > The problems with enabling irqs in hardirq handlers are that you get
> > unlimited irq nesting, which is bad for your stack, furthermore, somehow
> > people thing it makes things 'faster' because the irq-off latency goes
> > down.
>
> No, you don't get unlimited IRQ nesting, at least not on sane archs with
> a decent PIC that does things like what I described above :-)
Right, welcome to x86 ;-)
Sounds to me we need to extend genirq a bit... Thomas?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-06 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-02 12:21 [RFC][PATCH] irq: remove IRQF_DISABLED Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-02 14:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-02 15:47 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-03-02 15:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-02 16:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-03-02 21:01 ` Russell King
2009-03-02 21:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-02 21:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-02 17:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-03-02 17:55 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-03-02 18:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-02 18:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-02 18:27 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-03-02 18:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-03-02 18:48 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-03-02 19:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-03-02 19:18 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-03-02 17:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-02 18:45 ` Vadim Lobanov
2009-03-02 18:45 ` Vadim Lobanov
2009-03-02 18:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-03-05 15:40 ` Mark Lord
2009-03-02 21:17 ` Alan Cox
2009-03-02 21:17 ` Alan Cox
2009-03-06 8:58 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-03-06 9:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-06 9:59 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-03-06 10:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-03-06 10:24 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-03-06 17:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-06 21:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-03-02 17:55 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-02 18:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=1236335049.6326.114.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox