lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Question about IRQ_PENDING/IRQ_REPLAY
Date
>And I seriously doubt that PPC SMP irq handling has gotten _nearly_ the
>amount of testing and hard work that the x86 counterpart has. Things
>like support for CPU affinity, per-irq spinlocks, etc etc.

Some of those are the reason I moved part of the x86 irq.c code to PPC
indeed.

>Now, I'm not saying that irq.c would necessarily work as-is. It probably
>doesn't support all the things that other architectures might need (but
>with three completely different irq controllers on just standard PCs
>alone, I bet it supports most of it), and I know ia64 wants to extend it
>to be more spread out over different CPU's, but most of the high-level
>stuff probably _can_ and should be fairly common.

And I think they are. One thing is that if made "common", do_IRQ have to
be split into an arch-specific function that retrives the irq_number (and
does the ack on some controller), and the actual "dispatch" function that
does all the flags game and calls the handler.

I've slightly extended it using the IRQ_PERCPU flag to prevent IRQ_INPROGRESS
from ever beeing set (a bit hackish but I wanted that for IPIs since they
use ordinary irq_desc structures for us in most cases).

Ben.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.072 / U:0.256 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site