linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq

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

Date:	Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:58:00 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H.PeterA" <"nvin hpa"@zytor.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq_work

On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 14:50 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 14:47 +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 14:43 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > > Hi, Peter,
> > 
> > > I fact I uses exactly the similar method in my patches, just trigger it
> > > with soft_irq instead of IRQ. Please take a look at
> > > nmi_return_notifier_schedule in
> > 
> > But then why still use softirq? Once you have this its completely
> > useless.
> 
> Some systems have no self interrupt, for example the system without
> APIC. We need to provide a fallback for them. soft_irq can help here.

So there's systems that don't have self-ipi but do have NMI context?

Can't we run the callbacks from the tick or something for such legacy
muck? I really don't like the whole softirq mess.
--
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/