| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:36:18 -0800 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [patch] x86, apic: use 0x20 for the IRQ_MOVE_CLEANUP_VECTOR instead of 0x1f "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes: > On 01/11/2010 05:52 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> After having the documentation quoted at me. I am having a distinct >> memory of one piece of documentation saying: >> "interrupts within a priority level can be delivered in any order" >> >> So I am guessing there is not any ordering of interrupts in the same >> priority level until they get to the local apic. >> > > There is no ordering of interrupts before they hit the local APIC, since > the local APIC is what would serialize them... The io apic serializes them, and sends them over either the 2-wire bus or the front side bus. How much serialization and prioritization happens at that point I am not certain, but some certainly happens before you get to the local apic. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists