[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090131221939.GD29364@elte.hu>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 23:19:39 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Alexey Zaytsev <alexey.zaytsev@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [git pull] scheduler fixes
* Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:08:47 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 20:49 +0300, Alexey Zaytsev wrote:
> > >
> > > And answering an earlier question, this happens only on i386 and only
> > > with 4K stacks because x86_64 dosn't have a separate softirq stack,
> > > so the preempt count diring the soft irq is at least IRQ_EXIT_OFFSET.
> >
> > What do the other 30 odd architectures that Linux supports do? Is i386
> > 4k really the _only_ with separate softirq stacks?
>
> x86-64 and some of the other platforms could do with IRQ stacks but that
> is another story.
64-bit x86 already has IRQ stacks [16K large, per CPU], separate from the
8K syscall/process stack.
The question here is that on 64-bit hardirqs and softirqs share the same
stack (it's large enough). On 32-bit we have them separated.
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