From: tglx@linutronix.de (Thomas Gleixner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 3/4] irq: Allow multiple clients to register for irq affinity notification
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:20:28 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410081607510.4292@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140926094003.GL5182@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Fri, 26 Sep 2014, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:29:56AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > > Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe we're just lucky and nobody uses
> > > them together, but irq_set_affinity_notifier() only allows a single
> > > notifier to be registered at any given time. So if you had a system
> >
> > A single notifier per irq .....
>
> So what about two drivers wanting to use this notifier, but sharing an
> interrupt?
>
> It sounds to me like this notifier was misdesigned from the very start,
> and it should always have supported multiple notifiers.
Well, it was designed for a particular usecase which does not require
multiple notifiers. And we wanted it as simple as possible.
So while we could make it take multiple notifiers, it's just wrong for
the use case in question. QoS wants a system wide overview and not a
gazillion notifiers with life time issues etc.
So the proper solution is a general notifier, which gets called if any
interrupt affinity changes. That allows the QoS code or any other
interested party to gain a coherent per CPU knowledge.
That also avoid the whole lifetime issues of notifiers on interrupts,
when they are teared down and the descriptor gets freed. Of course
such a teardown or a simple disable_irq should inform the QoS code as
well so it knows that the CPU is not longer targeted by this
interrupt. Nothing we want to whack into a per irq notifier, really.
Thoughts?
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-08 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-27 20:14 [PATCH v3 0/4] PM QoS: per-cpu PM QoS support Lina Iyer
2014-08-27 20:14 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] QoS: Modify data structures and function arguments for scalability Lina Iyer
2014-08-27 20:14 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] QoS: Enhance framework to support per-cpu PM QoS request Lina Iyer
2014-08-27 20:14 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] irq: Allow multiple clients to register for irq affinity notification Lina Iyer
2014-08-27 20:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-09-02 18:43 ` Lina Iyer
2014-09-02 20:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
[not found] ` <20140924221023.GD1004@ilina-mac.local>
2014-09-25 15:43 ` Lina Iyer
2014-09-25 15:50 ` Lina Iyer
2014-10-08 15:03 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-10 15:11 ` Lina Iyer
2014-10-17 7:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-11-18 6:22 ` Lina Iyer
2014-09-25 20:35 ` Kevin Hilman
2014-09-26 9:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-09-26 9:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-09-26 15:10 ` Kevin Hilman
2014-10-08 14:20 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2014-08-27 20:14 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] QoS: Enable PM QoS requests to apply only on smp_affinity of an IRQ Lina Iyer
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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1410081607510.4292@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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