From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] irq_work: Architecture support for remote irq work raise
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 18:29:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140512162947.GB28033@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1399864310.17624.69.camel@pasglop>
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 01:11:50PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 10:08 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 01:33 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > We are going to extend irq work to support remote queuing.
> > >
> > > So lets add a cpu argument to arch_irq_work_raise(). The architectures
> > > willing to support that must then provide the backend to raise irq work
> > > IPIs remotely.
> > >
> > > Initial support is provided for x86 and ARM since they are easily
> > > extended. The other archs that overwrite arch_irq_work_raise() seem
> > > to use local clock interrupts and therefore need deeper rewrite of their
> > > irq work support to implement remote raising.
> >
> > Well, looks like it's time to turn it into an IPI... It gets a bit more
> > tricky because whether whacking the interrupt controller is safe to
> > do from an NMI is safe or not might depend on that irq controller
> > implementation...
> >
> > It looks like XICS and MPIC should be safe though, so at least we
> > should be able to cover ppc64, but I'll leave ppc32 alone.
>
> Correction... that's actually a bit more tricky. We might need an MMIO
> to trigger the IPI. That means potentially having to take a hash miss,
> and we certainly can't do that at NMI time at the moment.
>
> We *could* hard disable interrupts (which blocks our NMIs since they
> arent't real NMIs, they are just a way to bypass our soft-disable state
> for perf interrupts) for hash_page, but that still makes me somewhat
> nervous.
>
> Another option would be to add an ioremap flag of some description to
> be able to install bolted hash entries. (It already does so if called
> early enough during boot, so it might actually just work by accident but
> that's an undebuggable horror show waiting to happen if we ever change
> that).
>
> So needs a bit more thinking on our side.
Yeah, well if we ever end up with native remote irq work, only local raise
will need to be NMI-safe. If that ever helps...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-12 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-11 23:33 [RFC PATCH 0/5] nohz: Move nohz kick out of scheduler IPI, v3 Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-11 23:33 ` [PATCH 1/5] irq_work: Architecture support for remote irq work raise Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-12 0:08 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-12 3:11 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-12 16:29 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2014-05-12 7:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-12 16:26 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-12 17:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-12 17:41 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-11 23:33 ` [PATCH 2/5] irq_work: Force non-lazy works on IPI Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-11 23:33 ` [PATCH 3/5] irq_work: Allow remote queueing Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-11 23:33 ` [PATCH 4/5] nohz: Move full nohz kick to its own IPI Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-11 23:33 ` [PATCH 5/5] nohz: Use IPI implicit full barrier against rq->nr_running r/w Frederic Weisbecker
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=20140512162947.GB28033@localhost.localdomain \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=khilman@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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