Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [Q]: Linux and real device drivers | Date | Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:02:53 +0100 (BST) | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> on a CPU while new IRQs come in on the other processor. It can be better for > cache as well, since interrupts do less work and are therefore less > disruptive of the instruction and data cache. This would help cache on both > SMP and UP systems.
Oh joyous - you want to play pingpong with the cache across the irq and task execution side. Other OS's actually schedule stuff aggressively onto the same CPU to avoid that.
> When you structure things this way, it also tends to minimize the amount of > driver code requiring that you disable interrupts. No data structures other > than the semaphore that are accessed from interrupt, so you don't have to > block interrupts when doing mutual exclusion.
Granted - its _very_ good for hard real time. It isnt so hot for throughput
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |