linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC: linux-next 1/2] irq: Add CPU mask affinity hint callback framework

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1272576550.9614.51.camel@localhost>
Date:	Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:29:10 -0700
From:	Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"arjan@...ux.jf.intel.com" <arjan@...ux.jf.intel.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC: linux-next 1/2] irq: Add CPU mask affinity hint
 callback framework

On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 13:39 -0700, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Peter P Waskiewicz Jr wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 12:48 -0700, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Thinking more about it, I wonder whether you have a cpu_mask in your
> > > driver/device private data anyway. I bet you have :)
> > 
> > Well, at this point we don't, but nothing says we can't.
> 
> Somewhere you need to store that information in your driver, right ?

Yes.  But right now, storing a cpu_mask for an interrupt wouldn't buy us
anything since we have no mechanism to make use of it today.  :-)

I'll be putting the cpu_mask entry in our q_vector structure, which is
our abstraction of the MSI-X vector (it's where I have the hint struct
right now in patch 2/2 for the ixgbe driver).  It's a simple place to
stick it.

> > > So it should be sufficient to set a pointer to that cpu_mask in
> > > irq_desc and get rid of the callback completely.
> > 
> > So "register" would just assign the pointer, and "unregister" would make
> > sure to NULL the mask pointer out.  I like it.  It'll sure clean things
> > up too.
> 
> Yep, that'd be like the set_irq_chip() function. Just assign the
> pointer under desc->lock.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx


--
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/