[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081216204946.GE14787@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:49:46 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: add handle_irq() to allow interrupt injection
* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> Xen uses a different interrupt path, so introduce handle_irq() to
> allow interrupts to be inserted into the normal interrupt path. This
> is handled slightly differently on 32 and 64-bit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/irq.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/irq_32.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> ===================================================================
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/irq.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/irq.h
> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
> extern unsigned int do_IRQ(struct pt_regs *regs);
> extern void init_IRQ(void);
> extern void native_init_IRQ(void);
> +extern bool handle_irq(unsigned irq, struct pt_regs *regs);
>
> /* Interrupt vector management */
> extern DECLARE_BITMAP(used_vectors, NR_VECTORS);
> ===================================================================
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq_32.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq_32.c
> @@ -191,6 +191,26 @@
> execute_on_irq_stack(int overflow, struct irq_desc *desc, int irq) { return 0; }
> #endif
>
> +bool handle_irq(unsigned irq, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + struct irq_desc *desc;
> + int overflow;
> +
> + overflow = check_stack_overflow();
> +
> + desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
> + if (unlikely(!desc))
> + return false;
> +
> + if (!execute_on_irq_stack(overflow, desc, irq)) {
> + if (unlikely(overflow))
> + print_stack_overflow();
> + desc->handle_irq(irq, desc);
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * do_IRQ handles all normal device IRQ's (the special
> * SMP cross-CPU interrupts have their own specific
> @@ -200,31 +220,19 @@
> {
> struct pt_regs *old_regs;
> /* high bit used in ret_from_ code */
> - int overflow;
> unsigned vector = ~regs->orig_ax;
> - struct irq_desc *desc;
> unsigned irq;
>
> -
> old_regs = set_irq_regs(regs);
> irq_enter();
> irq = __get_cpu_var(vector_irq)[vector];
>
> - overflow = check_stack_overflow();
> -
> - desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
> - if (unlikely(!desc)) {
> + if (!handle_irq(irq, regs)) {
> printk(KERN_EMERG "%s: cannot handle IRQ %d vector %#x cpu %d\n",
> __func__, irq, vector, smp_processor_id());
> BUG();
> }
>
> - if (!execute_on_irq_stack(overflow, desc, irq)) {
> - if (unlikely(overflow))
> - print_stack_overflow();
> - desc->handle_irq(irq, desc);
> - }
> -
> irq_exit();
> set_irq_regs(old_regs);
> return 1;
> ===================================================================
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c
> @@ -40,6 +40,20 @@
> #endif
> }
>
> +bool handle_irq(unsigned irq, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + struct irq_desc *desc;
> +
> + stack_overflow_check(regs);
> +
> + desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
> + if (unlikely(!desc))
> + return false;
> +
> + generic_handle_irq_desc(irq, desc);
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * do_IRQ handles all normal device IRQ's (the special
> * SMP cross-CPU interrupts have their own specific
> @@ -48,7 +62,6 @@
> asmlinkage unsigned int do_IRQ(struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> struct pt_regs *old_regs = set_irq_regs(regs);
> - struct irq_desc *desc;
>
> /* high bit used in ret_from_ code */
> unsigned vector = ~regs->orig_ax;
> @@ -56,14 +69,10 @@
>
> exit_idle();
> irq_enter();
> +
> irq = __get_cpu_var(vector_irq)[vector];
>
> - stack_overflow_check(regs);
> -
> - desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
> - if (likely(desc))
> - generic_handle_irq_desc(irq, desc);
> - else {
> + if (!handle_irq(irq, regs)) {
> if (!disable_apic)
> ack_APIC_irq();
>
the changes look rather similar. Could you please look into unifying
irq_*.c before adding more logic to it?
Ingo
--
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