Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq_work

Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24T07:32:14Z

On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 15:27 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 15:19 +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 15:04 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> >
> > > Yes. NMI is there from 8259 age.
> >
> > But do we really care about such systems?
> >
> > > That is possible. But in NO_HZ system, we have no tick to rely on.
> >
> > Of course you have, you can delay the NO_HZ state when there's pending
> > callbacks, that's all of 1 line.
> >
> > > soft_irq is better here, because it will be triggered for any interrupt.
> >
> > Well, you can do the callbacks from irq_exit() as well, that's no
> > problem.
>
> I think it is not a good idea to add overhead in such a hot path if the
> overhead can be avoided.

True, but I really don't like the softirq thing, and I really don't care
about !APIC machines, I probably couldn't buy one if I wanted to and its
not like we have good MCE support for them now, so who cares.