[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1408122038500.6061@knanqh.ubzr>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 20:39:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] irqchip: gic: Allow gic_arch_extn hooks to call into
scheduler
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 08/05/14 19:34, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >
> >> It allows us to synchronize with another CPU that may be inside
> >> gic_raise_softirq(). If the other CPU was in that function then this CPU
> >> would wait until it was done sending the IPI to continue along and
> >> reroute them. If the other CPU was just about to grab the sgi lock then
> >> we would guarantee that the CPU would see the new gic_cpu_map value and
> >> thus any redirection is not necessary.
> > OK I get it now.
> >
> >> I hoped that the commit text explained this.
> > I'm possibly not bright enough to get it the first time.
> >
> >> Honestly it probably isn't a noticeable performance boost either way
> >> but I think this is the best we can do.
> > Sure, agreed.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Ok, so which patch is preferred?
I'd say the later.
Nicolas
--
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