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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 19 Feb 2021 23:08:08 -0800
From:   Brad Boyer <>
To:     Finn Thain <>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <>,
        "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>, "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC] IRQ handlers run with some high-priority interrupts(not
 NMI) enabled on some platform

On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 05:32:30PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> Nope. Interrupt priority masking is there to place an upper bound 
> interrupt latency. That's why this feature is shipping in contemporary 
> hardware (e.g. ARM GIC). If you care about real time workloads on arm64, 
> that may interest you.

I don't know if it's still true today, but in the past there was a very
noticeable difference in timer stability between the 68k macintosh
models with the timer interrupt at IPL 1 as compared to the models
where the timer interrupt was at IPL 6. The ability to preempt the
other interrupt handlers made the difference between a usable clock
and one that was pretty unreliable.

	Brad Boyer

Powered by blists - more mailing lists