[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1109072043020.2723@ionos>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 20:43:56 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc: yong.zhang0@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
joe@...ches.com, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/62] sparc: irq: Remove IRQF_DISABLED
On Wed, 7 Sep 2011, David Miller wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 19:57:21 +0200 (CEST)
>
> > On Wed, 7 Sep 2011, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> >> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 19:33:52 +0200 (CEST)
> >>
> >> We had big problems when openning thousands of virtual network
> >> devices, each with their own unique IRQ, and pointed all at the same
> >> cpu, and we'd get IRQ stack overflows.
> >>
> >> See commit c58543c869606532c2382f027d6466f4672ea756
> >>
> >> So this change to make IRQF_DISABLED a nop has reintroduced this bug.
> >
> > See commit e58aa3d2d0cc01ad8d6f7f640a0670433f794922
> >
> > We run ALL interrupt handlers with interrupts disabled for that reason
> > and we even check and yell when an interrupt handler returns with
> > interrupts enabled. That's why IRQF_DISABLED became meaningless.
>
> Awesome.
>
> Can I politely ask that a reference to that commit and something like
> your paragraph here explaining things is added to these IRQF_DISABLED
> removal patches?
That's a good idea. I'll let sed loose on the changelogs when I pick
them up.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists