[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100624110830.GC578@basil.fritz.box>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:08:30 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H.PeterA" <"nvin hpa"@zytor.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq_work
> And I really want hardirq context for perf callbacks, some code actually
> relies on it (I used to have the fallback in the timer softirq and that
Surely that could be fixed? *requiring* hard irq context sounds weird.
> broke thing at some point).
I have one case that needs to sleep (but only when interrupting user code)
They key thing in it really is to switch stacks back to process.
-andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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