lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: mutex vs. local irqs (Was: 2.6.18 -mm merge plans)

* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:

> during boot). In addition to that, archs need to add something to their
> actual interrupt entry:
>
> if (no_irq_boot) {
> local_irq_disable();
> return;
> }

that just moves the suckage from the mutex-debugging slowpath to the
irq-handling hotpath. (at which point i still prefer to have that in the
mutex-debugging path)

a better solution would be to install boot-time IRQ vectors that just do
nothing but return. They dont mask, they dont ACK nor EOI - they just
return. The only thing that could break this is a screaming interrupt,
and even that one probably just slows things down a tiny bit until we
get so far in the init sequence to set up the PIC.

Ingo
-
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: 2006-06-07 15:25    [W:0.241 / U:0.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site