[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080924143552.29a14f10@bull.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:35:52 +0200
From: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@...l.net>
To: benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc: Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@...ibm.com>,
Christoph Raisch <RAISCH@...ibm.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH HACK] powerpc: quick hack to get a functional eHEA with
hardirq preemption
Hi Ben,
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:17:47 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 04:58 -0500, Milton Miller wrote:
> > The per-interrupt mask and unmask calls have to go through RTAS, a
> > single-threaded global context, which in addition to increasing
> > path length will really limit scalability. The interrupt controller
> > poll and reject facilities are accessed through hypervisor calls
> > which are comparable to a fast syscall, and parallel to all cpus.
>
> Note also that the XICS code thus assumes, iirc, as does the cell IIC
> code, that eoi is called on the -same- cpu that fetched the interrupt
> initially. That assumption can be broken with IRQ threads no ?
No, the fetch and the eoi are both done in interrupt context before
the hardirq thread is woken up.
On the other hand, the mask+eoi and the unmask may well happen
on different cpus as there's only one hardirq thread per irq on
the system. Don't know if this is a problem with the XICS though.
Thanks,
Sebastien.
>
> Ben.
>
>
>
--
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