From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Don't acquire rt_spin_lock in allocate_vpe_l1_table()
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2026 23:11:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ms2nsqju.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <864iowmrx6.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Thu, Jan 08 2026 at 08:26, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Err, no. That's horrible. I can see three ways to address this in a
> more appealing way:
>
> - you give RT a generic allocator that works for (small) atomic
> allocations. I appreciate that's not easy, and even probably
> contrary to the RT goals. But I'm also pretty sure that the GIC code
> is not the only pile of crap being caught doing that.
>
> - you pre-compute upfront how many cpumasks you are going to require,
> based on the actual GIC topology. You do that on CPU0, outside of
> the hotplug constraints, and allocate what you need. This is
> difficult as you need to ensure the RD<->CPU matching without the
> CPUs having booted, which means wading through the DT/ACPI gunk to
> try and guess what you have.
>
> - you delay the allocation of L1 tables to a context where you can
> perform allocations, and before we have a chance of running a guest
> on this CPU. That's probably the simplest option (though dealing
> with late onlining while guests are already running could be
> interesting...).
At the point where a CPU is brought up, the topology should be known
already, which means this can be allocated on the control CPU _before_
the new CPU comes up, no?
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-08 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-07 21:53 [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Don't acquire rt_spin_lock in allocate_vpe_l1_table() Waiman Long
2026-01-08 8:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-01-08 22:11 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2026-01-09 16:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-01-11 9:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-01-11 10:38 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-01-11 16:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-01-12 11:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-01-12 14:08 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-01-12 14:38 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-01-21 8:38 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-01-21 16:48 ` Waiman Long
2026-01-21 20:41 ` Waiman Long
2026-01-22 3:49 ` Waiman Long
2026-03-09 19:06 ` Waiman Long
2026-03-10 8:12 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-01-11 23:02 ` Waiman Long
2026-01-12 15:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-01-12 17:14 ` Waiman Long
2026-01-13 11:55 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-01-13 23:25 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-01-14 16:01 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-01-14 17:59 ` Vlastimil Babka
2026-01-21 16:37 ` Waiman Long
2026-01-10 21:47 ` Waiman Long
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=87ms2nsqju.ffs@tglx \
--to=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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