[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100624115838.GG578@basil.fritz.box>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:58:39 +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
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:42:11PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:20 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Ok so going back to the original self-irq patchkit. Unfortunately the other
> > reviewer hated that. How to get out of that deadlock?
>
> Well, I didn't like your original patch either.
>
> What's wrong with going with the patch I posted today? (aside from me
> getting the barriers slightly wrong and not doing the arch
> implementation).
Well it would need to work.
Also I personally didn't see the point of the irq items list because
there's no good way to dynamically allocate it in a NMI, so the window
would be always "fixed size" anyways and you could as well just use
per cpu data.
That's why for simple self irq I preferred Ying's original patch.
-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