linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: ARM Cortex-A7 support in Linux
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 12:50:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51961989.7020409@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130517114827.GI23112@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>

On 17/05/13 12:48, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:42:11PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 17/05/13 12:36, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:55:00AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:47:45PM +0200, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>>> It depends which feature you're after. Linux supports the GIC
>>>>> virtualization extensions with KVM, for example. But we don't make any use
>>>>> of other things like priorities, split deactivation/priority drop...
>>>>
>>>> Not that we could make use of priorities anymore as all interrupt handlers
>>>> are now run with IRQs disabled; an IRQ handler can't be interrupted by a
>>>> higher priority IRQ coming in.
>>>>
>>>> Part of the solution to that is to go back to the original philosophy of
>>>> IRQ handling in Linux - do the least possible amount of work in the IRQ
>>>> and move the heavier stuff off into soft-IRQ context.  Unfortunately,
>>>> many drivers are no longer written like that, and just do a great amount
>>>> of time consuming work in their IRQ handler.
>>>
>>> We could also consider using interrupt priorities to have a fake NMI (I
>>> think PPC does this for some cores), which is useful for profiling and
>>> watchdogs, especially now that FIQ is often stolen by the secure world.
>>>
>>> I remember dismissing this in the past because I thought it would increase
>>> our GIC distributor accesses, but I don't remember why.
>>
>> I think it would rather require to write to the interrupt priority mask
>> register (GIC_PMR) in the CPU interface. The cost is probably the same,
>> actually (probably quite high, given how often we enable/disable
>> interrupts).
> 
> In terms of the hardware, maybe, but the distributor requires a lock and
> will also trap to the hypervisor if accessed from a guest.
> 
> However, since the GIC_PMR is in the CPU interface then that should be fine.

Absolutely. I was just thinking of the respective costs of a device
write vs setting the I bit in CPSR.

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

      reply	other threads:[~2013-05-17 11:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-05-17  9:56 ARM Cortex-A7 support in Linux Sharma Bhupesh-B45370
2013-05-17 10:47 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-17 10:55   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-17 11:36     ` Will Deacon
2013-05-17 11:42       ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-17 11:48         ` Will Deacon
2013-05-17 11:50           ` Marc Zyngier [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=51961989.7020409@arm.com \
    --to=marc.zyngier@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).