From: tglx@linutronix.de (Thomas Gleixner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/3] genirq: add support for per-cpu dev_id interrupts
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 01:41:55 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1109160137130.2723@ionos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110915232903.GA22533@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:49:10AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Marc,
> >
> > On Thu, 15 Sep 2011, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > +
> > > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
> > > +
> > > + unregister_handler_proc(irq, action);
> > > +
> > > + /* Make sure it's not being used on another CPU: */
> > > + synchronize_irq(irq);
> >
> > That's not helping w/o making synchronize_irq() aware of the percpu
> > stuff. Also there is the question whether we need the ability to
> > remove such interrupts in the first place. The target users are low
> > level arch interrupts not some random device drivers.
>
> You do - think local timers which go away on hotunplug and come back
> on hotplug. The alternative is requiring every local timer code to
> remember whether it registered its per-cpu handler on each CPU or not,
> and that just gets more messy than having them unregister on hotunplug.
> Not only would that be more prone to bugs but it will also mean extra
> complexity in arch code.
Yikes! That code is removing the GLOBAL action, so all users are going
to hell.
The point of the percpu_irq stuff is to have a single action with a
percpu dev_id and a per cpu enable/disable. So when you unplug your
cpu that very cpu calls the disable function and therefor removes
itself w/o causing the other cpus to die on action = NULL
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-15 23:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-15 16:52 [RFC PATCH 0/3] genirq: handling GIC per-cpu interrupts Marc Zyngier
2011-09-15 16:52 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] genirq: add support for per-cpu dev_id interrupts Marc Zyngier
2011-09-15 21:36 ` Michał Mirosław
2011-09-16 8:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-09-16 9:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-15 22:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-15 23:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-09-15 23:41 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2011-09-16 9:37 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-09-16 9:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-18 23:20 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
2011-09-19 9:28 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-09-19 15:00 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-09-19 15:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-09-19 15:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-09-26 1:31 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
2011-09-26 1:58 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
2011-09-15 16:52 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] ARM: gic: consolidate PPI handling Marc Zyngier
2011-09-15 16:52 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] ARM: gic, local timers: use the request_percpu_irq() interface Marc Zyngier
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.LFD.2.02.1109160137130.2723@ionos \
--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