From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2, v2] x86: replace nr_irqs sized per-domain
	arrays with radix trees
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 09:13:51 +0100
Message-ID: <C9E6C94F.17346%keir.xen@gmail.com>
References: <4DC11C1C020000780003F9DF@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DC11C1C020000780003F9DF@vpn.id2.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Allen M Kay <allen.m.kay@intel.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 04/05/2011 08:27, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:

>>>> On 03.05.11 at 23:08, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org> wrote:
>> On 03/05/2011 15:08, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> It would seem possible to fold the two trees into one (making e.g. the
>>> emuirq bits stored in the upper half of the pointer), but I'm not
>>> certain that's worth it as it would make deletion of entries more
>>> cumbersome. Unless pirq-s and emuirq-s were mutually exclusive...
>>> 
>>> v2: Split setup/teardown into two stages - (de-)allocation (tree node
>>> (de-)population) is done with just d->event_lock held (and hence
>>> interrupts enabled), while actual insertion/removal of translation data
>>> gets done with irq_desc's lock held (and interrupts disabled).
>> 
>> This is mostly okay, because the only operations that occur with irqs
>> disabled are read-only on the radix-rtree structure itself, hence no
>> alloc/dealloc will happen. *However* those calls to
>> radix_tree_lookup[_slot]() are not synchronised wrt your calls to
>> radix_tree_{insert,delete}(). The latter hold d->event_lock, while the
>> former do not. Hence you need RCU and you need a new first patch in your
>> patch set to pull in a modern radix-tree.[ch] from upstream Linux.
> 
> Right you are - I didn't pay attention to the tree internal nodes.
> Will take a few days though before I can get to this.

Actually I'll take a look at it myself.

 -- Keir

> Jan
>