linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] AHCI: Conserve interrupts with pci_enable_msi_block

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:	Wed, 4 Sep 2013 10:55:59 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] AHCI: Conserve interrupts with
 pci_enable_msi_block_part() interface

Hello,

On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 09:22:57AM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> I think a general approach that will cover it all (including ICH and undesired
> sharing of interrupt vectors) - start MME from roundup_pow_of_two(n_ports) and
> ensure MRSM bit is unset. If not - double MME and retry. If still not and the
> limit is reached - fall back to single MSI.
> 
> Makes sense?

Ugh... I really don't want this sort of retry loop.  I'm still a bit
lost on why this is necessary.  Can you please elaborate?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/