From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
andrea.gallo@stericsson.com, dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net,
eric.y.miao@gmail.com, hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk,
John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
linux@bohmer.net, nico@marvell.com,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] genirq: warn about IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED at the right place
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 02:52:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100315025249.GP6491@shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100312171423.b7e7a838.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> We can tweak and tune until we're blue in the face, but the system's
> IRQ latency will always be worse if handlers always run with interrupts
> disabled.
Are you sure?
If good, fast irq handler A runs with interrupts enabled,
and good, fast irq handler B runs (interrupting A),
A's latency goes _up_ not down.
If B happens first, then you get B's latency going up, and A's latency going down.
It's not really clear what happens to average latency. But if you
know that some handlers require lower latency than others (e.g. serial
ports with small FIFOs), it makes sense to prioritise them.
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-15 2:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <201003112208.o2BM8wJU013575@imap1.linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003130031300.22855@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <20100312155015.090ba541.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2010-03-13 0:59 ` [patch 2/3] genirq: warn about IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED at the right place Thomas Gleixner
2010-03-12 22:14 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-15 2:52 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2010-03-15 3:25 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-15 8:38 ` Uwe Kleine-König
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=20100315025249.GP6491@shareable.org \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrea.gallo@stericsson.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=eric.y.miao@gmail.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@bohmer.net \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nico@marvell.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/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