From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Drake <drake@endlessm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
ath9k-devel@qca.qualcomm.com, linux@endlessm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI MSI: allow alignment restrictions on vector allocation
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 23:46:26 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710032344590.2278@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171003213434.GI25517@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 11:07:58PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > > > 2) The affinity setting of straight MSI interrupts (w/o remapping) on x86
> > > > requires to make the affinity change from the interrupt context of the
> > > > current active vector in order not to lose interrupts or worst case
> > > > getting into a stale state.
> > > >
> > > > That works for single vectors, but trying to move all vectors in one
> > > > go is more or less impossible, as there is no reliable way to
> > > > determine that none of the other vectors is on flight.
> > > >
> > > > There might be some 'workarounds' for that, but I rather avoid that
> > > > unless we get an official documented one from Intel/AMD.
> > >
> > > Thinking more about it. That might be actually a non issue for MSI, but we
> > > have that modus operandi in the current code and we need to address that
> > > first before even thinking about multi MSI support.
> >
> > But even if its possible, it's very debatable whether it's worth the effort
> > when this driver just can use the legacy INTx.and be done with it.
>
> Daniel said "Legacy interrupts do not work on that module, so MSI
> support is required," so I assume he means INTx doesn't work. Maybe
Hmm, I missed that detail obviously.
> the driver could poll? I don't know how much slower that would be,
> but at least it would penalize the broken device, not everybody.
That would definitely be prefered.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-03 21:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-25 4:11 [PATCH] PCI MSI: allow alignment restrictions on vector allocation Daniel Drake
2017-09-26 20:32 ` kbuild test robot
2017-09-27 15:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-10-02 8:57 ` Daniel Drake
2017-10-02 14:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-10-02 16:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-10-03 21:07 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-10-03 21:34 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2017-10-03 21:46 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2017-10-05 4:23 ` Daniel Drake
2017-10-05 10:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
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.2.20.1710032344590.2278@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=ath9k-devel@qca.qualcomm.com \
--cc=drake@endlessm.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@endlessm.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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