[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2 v3] SGI RTC: add generic timer system interrupt

* H. Peter Anvin <> wrote:

> Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> >
> > There are basically two issues with using 'normal IRQs' in cases like this:
> >
> > - Using normal IRQs would mean we would have an IRQ per cpu. The current
> > hard coded maximum, NR_IRQS, is 4352 (NR_VECTORS + (32 * MAX_IO_APICS)).
> > On machines with large numbers of cpus and an irq per cpu for each desired
> > interrupt, that's a lot of IRQs. In addition, the GRU, will need 2 such
> > IRQs per cpu. On 4096 cpu systems, you've already used up more than the
> > limit just for that. Until some sort of infrastructure change takes place
> > that would potentially allow this to be dynamically increased, such as
> > Yinghai Lu's "sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v14" patch, this problem will exist.
> >
> > Furthermore, the actual runtime limit, nr_irqs, is set to 96 by
> > probe_nr_irqs for our configuration. This is because that code assumes all
> > vectors are io-apic vectors, not cpu centric vectors like the ones I'm
> > talking about. With the current, scheme, even on a 128 cpu system, I'm out
> > of IRQs immediately.
> >
> > - The current infrastructure for requesting vector/IRQ combinations doesn't
> > allow one to request an interrupt priority higher than i/o device interrupt
> > priorities. Clock event (high resolution timer) code should run at higher
> > interrupt priority.
> Okay, so it is a hack pending us taking care of issues in the
> current code. #1 we're obviously working on, #2 I need to think
> some more about but shouldn't be too hard to fix -- if real, it also
> affects other interrupt-driven clock sources.
> I'm OK with this being a temporary hack, but I want it to be
> recognized as such and cleaned up as soon as possible.


Dimitri, looks like there are no blocker issues - John's clocksource
comments need to be addressed and then we should be green to go for
having this applied.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-23 14:39    [W:0.051 / U:6.128 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site