From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
To: Lin Ming <mlin@ss.pku.edu.cn>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net>,
Ben Guthro <ben@guthro.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Marcus Granado <marcus.granado@citrix.com>,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xen: implement IRQ_WORK_VECTOR handler
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:32:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120416203210.GD14982@phenom.dumpdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1334470172-3861-3-git-send-email-mlin@ss.pku.edu.cn>
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 02:09:32PM +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Lin Ming <mlin@ss.pku.edu.cn>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/xen/events.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/xen/smp.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/events.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/events.h
> index 1df3541..cc146d5 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/events.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/events.h
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ enum ipi_vector {
> XEN_CALL_FUNCTION_VECTOR,
> XEN_CALL_FUNCTION_SINGLE_VECTOR,
> XEN_SPIN_UNLOCK_VECTOR,
> + XEN_IRQ_WORK_VECTOR,
>
> XEN_NR_IPIS,
> };
> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> index 2dc6628..92ad12d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
> #include <linux/err.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/smp.h>
> +#include <linux/irq_work.h>
>
> #include <asm/paravirt.h>
> #include <asm/desc.h>
> @@ -41,10 +42,12 @@ cpumask_var_t xen_cpu_initialized_map;
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, xen_resched_irq);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, xen_callfunc_irq);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, xen_callfuncsingle_irq);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, xen_irq_work);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, xen_debug_irq) = -1;
>
> static irqreturn_t xen_call_function_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id);
> static irqreturn_t xen_call_function_single_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id);
> +static irqreturn_t xen_irq_work_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id);
>
> /*
> * Reschedule call back.
> @@ -143,6 +146,17 @@ static int xen_smp_intr_init(unsigned int cpu)
> goto fail;
> per_cpu(xen_callfuncsingle_irq, cpu) = rc;
>
> + callfunc_name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "irqwork%d", cpu);
> + rc = bind_ipi_to_irqhandler(XEN_IRQ_WORK_VECTOR,
> + cpu,
> + xen_irq_work_interrupt,
> + IRQF_DISABLED|IRQF_PERCPU|IRQF_NOBALANCING,
> + callfunc_name,
> + NULL);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + goto fail;
> + per_cpu(xen_irq_work, cpu) = rc;
> +
> return 0;
>
> fail:
> @@ -155,6 +169,8 @@ static int xen_smp_intr_init(unsigned int cpu)
> if (per_cpu(xen_callfuncsingle_irq, cpu) >= 0)
> unbind_from_irqhandler(per_cpu(xen_callfuncsingle_irq, cpu),
> NULL);
> + if (per_cpu(xen_irq_work, cpu) >= 0)
> + unbind_from_irqhandler(per_cpu(xen_irq_work, cpu), NULL);
>
> return rc;
> }
> @@ -509,6 +525,9 @@ static inline int xen_map_vector(int vector)
> case CALL_FUNCTION_SINGLE_VECTOR:
> xen_vector = XEN_CALL_FUNCTION_SINGLE_VECTOR;
> break;
> + case IRQ_WORK_VECTOR:
> + xen_vector = XEN_IRQ_WORK_VECTOR;
> + break;
> default:
> xen_vector = -1;
> printk(KERN_ERR "xen: vector 0x%x is not implemented\n",
> @@ -588,6 +607,16 @@ static irqreturn_t xen_call_function_single_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> +static irqreturn_t xen_irq_work_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +{
> + irq_enter();
> + inc_irq_stat(apic_irq_work_irqs);
> + irq_work_run();
I think this usually done the other way around:
irq_work_run()
inc_irq_stat(apic_irq_work_irqs)
Or is there an excellent reason for doing it this way?
> + irq_exit();
> +
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +
> static const struct smp_ops xen_smp_ops __initconst = {
> .smp_prepare_boot_cpu = xen_smp_prepare_boot_cpu,
> .smp_prepare_cpus = xen_smp_prepare_cpus,
> @@ -634,6 +663,7 @@ static void xen_hvm_cpu_die(unsigned int cpu)
> unbind_from_irqhandler(per_cpu(xen_callfunc_irq, cpu), NULL);
> unbind_from_irqhandler(per_cpu(xen_debug_irq, cpu), NULL);
> unbind_from_irqhandler(per_cpu(xen_callfuncsingle_irq, cpu), NULL);
> + unbind_from_irqhandler(per_cpu(xen_irq_work, cpu), NULL);
> native_cpu_die(cpu);
> }
>
> --
> 1.7.2.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-16 20:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-15 6:09 Lin Ming
2012-04-15 6:09 ` [PATCH 1/2] xen: implement apic ipi interface Lin Ming
2012-04-19 19:02 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-04-19 19:11 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-04-15 6:09 ` [PATCH 2/2] xen: implement IRQ_WORK_VECTOR handler Lin Ming
2012-04-16 20:32 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [this message]
2012-04-19 8:46 ` Lin Ming
2012-04-19 20:00 ` [Xen-devel] " Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
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=20120416203210.GD14982@phenom.dumpdata.com \
--to=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=ben@guthro.net \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcus.granado@citrix.com \
--cc=mlin@ss.pku.edu.cn \
--cc=steven@uplinklabs.net \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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