[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003250915410.3721@i5.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:17:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, x86@...nel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prevent nested interrupts when the IRQ stack is near
overflowing v2
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> NOTE! Historically, the "fast" handlers also had a much faster irq
> response because they didn't do that whole MASK/ACK/END thing. So they'd
> just keep the CPU interrupts disabled, and ACK at the end, and I think
> we've even used AUTOEIO so that they didn't need any ACK at all, and we
> never touched the interrupt controller itself for them.
Btw, it was even more extreme than that. The fast irq handlers got a
totally separate kernel entry point, and wouldn't save all registers, only
the compiler-clobbered ones. Which is why they then had no "struct
pt_regs" etc.
And yes, it really mattered. Then later we got so bloated that it wasn't
much of an issue - and just made everything more complicated.
Linus
--
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