[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ee78b536-6a87-52c7-16c4-292f7ecbe61a@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 10:26:00 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, daniel.thompson@...aro.org,
joel@...lfernandes.org, mark.rutland@....com,
christoffer.dall@....com, james.morse@....com,
catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 19/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Remove acknowledge loop
On 28/08/18 16:51, Julien Thierry wrote:
> Multiple interrupts pending for a CPU is actually rare. Doing an
> acknowledge loop does not give much better performance or even can
> deteriorate them.
>
> Do not loop when an interrupt has been acknowledged, just return
> from interrupt and wait for another one to be raised.
>
> Tested-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
> ---
> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
It would probably be valuable to do the same thing for GICv1/v2, where
the MMIO access can be even more costly.
In the meantime, I've queued this for 4.20.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists