lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt handlers
    From
    Date
    Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> writes:
    >
    > - move long running handlers out of the hard interrupt context

    I'm not sure I'm really looking forward to this brave new world
    of very long running interrupt handlers. e.g. what do you
    do for example when some handler blocks for a very long time?

    > - improved debugability of the kernel: faulty handlers do not take
    > down the system.

    I had an old patch to handle this without threaded interrupts.

    What normally happens is when a interrupt oopses it tries to kill the
    idle process which panics. My fix was to just restart another idle
    process instead of panicing.

    But back then it was rejected by Linus with the argument that
    a crashing interrupt handler will typically hold some lock
    and the next time the interrupt happens it will deadlock on that
    lock.

    Has that changed with your threaded interrupts?

    If it has changed I suspect the restart idle change could
    be made to work to be equivalent in debuggability.

    > Comments, reviews, flames as usual.

    To be honest my opinion is that it will encourage badly written interrupt
    code longer term.

    -Andi

    --
    ak@linux.intel.com


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-10-02 16:49    [W:0.046 / U:0.932 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site