[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1379969467.11249.21.camel@pasglop>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 06:51:07 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@....ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/irq: Run softirqs off the top of the irq stack
On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 09:47 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is the "band aid" discussed so far for the stack overflow
> > problem for powerpc.
>
> I don't think it's a "band-aid" in any way, except perhaps in the
> sense that there are certainly other things we can also do in this
> series (ie I liked Frederic's cleanups etc).
Ah yes, I thought of it as a band-aid in the sense that a better
approach would be to switch to the irq stack earlier like x86_64 does
but that would be a lot more invasive. Definitely something I would look
into if I was to tackle changing how we do per-cpu and the PACA though.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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