From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] RFC: ux500: add PMU resources
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:12:51 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <000101cbb7da$93e05fe0$bba11fa0$@deacon@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110119115737.GC31652@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Hi Russell,
Thanks for the insight.
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:39:09AM -0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > 3.) Rework the GIC code so that an IRQ can target multiple CPUs and remove
> > the distributor-level masking. I think this was originally done so that
> > we can service different IRQs simultaneously, but with the deprecation
> > of IRQF_DISABLED I'm not sure if this is still an issue. If not, then
> > we can change to masking at the CPU interfaces which will make
> > supporting your combined IRQ much easier.
>
> If an interrupt is routed to multiple cores simultaneously, then you end
> up with a number of problems:
>
> 1. Each time an interrupt occurs, you wake up all CPUs.
> 2. One CPU wins the race and starts to handle the interrupt. The others
> are left spinning on a lock waiting. Eventually the lock is dropped
> and they too enter the handler.
> 3. Another race ensues on the drivers own spinlock. The winning CPU
> possibly holds this lock for the duration of its handling. Meanwhile
> the other CPUs are left spinning waiting for the lock to be dropped.
> 4. When the winning CPU drops the lock, it returns IRQ_HANDLED. The other
> CPUs find that there is no IRQ pending from the device, and return
> IRQ_NONE.
>
> (4) may result in the spurious/unhandled IRQ code eventually disabling
> the interrupt.
I don't think these are a problem if we only allow IRQs to be affine to
multiple CPUs when the IRQF_PERCPU flag is set. All other interrupts will
concern only a single CPU and the corresponding CPU interface.
For these PERCPU interrupts, the wakeups and lock contention is part of the
deal - that's a consequence of setting an affinity mask containing multiple
CPUs.
It's worth noting that the Virtualisation Extensions (Cortex-A15) only provide
a virtualised view of the CPU interfaces. The distributor must be trapped using
a second-stage translation by the hypervisor, so accessing it becomes a massive
overhead in the critical interrupt path in Linux.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-19 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-18 22:59 [PATCH] RFC: ux500: add PMU resources Linus Walleij
2011-01-19 11:39 ` Will Deacon
2011-01-19 11:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-19 13:12 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2011-02-02 9:52 ` Lee Jones
[not found] ` <-2131964397930844736@unknownmsgid>
2011-02-07 5:48 ` Rabin Vincent
2011-02-07 10:08 ` Will Deacon
2011-02-07 10:14 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-07 5:56 ` Rabin Vincent
2011-02-07 7:55 ` Lee Jones
2011-02-07 10:04 ` Linus Walleij
2011-02-07 10:25 ` Lee Jones
2011-02-07 11:39 ` Will Deacon
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='000101cbb7da$93e05fe0$bba11fa0$@deacon@arm.com' \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).