[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101221141950.GG1750@nowhere>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:19:54 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@....ibm.com>,
Tim Pepper <lnxninja@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 11/15] x86: Nohz task support
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 09:05:29AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 02:30 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 05:23:19PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:24 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Implement the thread flag, syscalls and exception hooks for
> > > > nohz task support.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I saw:
> > > - syscall
> > > - do_int3
> > > - do_debug (int1)
> > > - #PF
> > >
> > > So where's all other interrupts?
> >
> > No need to handle them.
> >
> > We have:
> >
> > rcu_irq_enter() rcu_irq_exit() rcu_nmi_enter() rcu_nmi_exit()
> > and they already act as pauses into extended quiescent states, which
> > is enough for our needs.
>
> Oh, and RCU is the only thing you need to worry about is it?
wrt userspace/kernelspace switches yes, for now. But perhaps I'll discover
more reasons to hook into that boundary.
--
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