lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC GIT PULL] softirq: Consolidation and stack overrun fix
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:55:47AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 15:56 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 02:42:57PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 04:44 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > So the safest way to fix this is to unconditionally call do_softirq()
> > > > from irq_exit().
> > > > A performance penalty may come along but safety primes.
> > > >
> > > > We should probably do that and work on longer term solutions (Kconfig
> > > > based arch switch, etc...)
> > > > for the next merge window?
> > >
> > > As you prefer, though I'm keen on getting the "fast" version in RHEL7 if
> > > RH will take it :-)
> >
> > So what is the fast version? Converting __do_softirq() to do_softirq()
> > unconditionally.
> >
> > RH will accept any fix that goes upstream.
>
> No, me fixing powerpc do_IRQ to do irq_exit run on the irq stack, and
> your fix for everybody else with an ifdef such that x86_64 and powerpc
> get to skip the additional stack switch.
>
> > >
> > > From the generic code POV, it's a one-liner #ifdef to select between
> > > do_softirq and __do_softirq() right ? Then it's up to the arch to
> > > #define I_CAN_DO_FAST !
> >
> > I'd rather say #define I_CAN_DO_SAFE :)
> >
> > But I guess the kind of symbol we want is some ARCH_HAS_IRQ_STACK_LOW_HANDLER
>
> ARCH_IRQ_EXIT_ON_IRQ_STACK

Ok, I'll pick this one.

Thanks!

>
> Cheers,
> Ben.
>
> > >
> > > > I'll respin the series plus the regression fix, unless somebody has a
> > > > better solution.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Ben.
> > >
> > >
>
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-25 11:01    [W:0.519 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site