[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] Separate IRQ-stacks from 4K-stacks option
    On Fri, 2004-09-10 at 11:34, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    > On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 05:28:52PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 05:15:38PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    > > > What we should consider regardless is disable the nesting of irqs for
    > > > performance reasons but that's an independent matter
    > >
    > > disabling nesting completely sounds a bit too aggressive, but limiting
    > > the nesting is probably a good idea.
    > disabling is actually not a bad idea; hard irq handlers run for a very short
    > time

    The glaring exception is the IDE io completion, which can run for 2000+
    usec even with a modern chipset and drive. Here's a 600 usec trace:

    The timer, RTC, and soundcard interrupts (among others) will not like
    being delayed this long. Ingo mentioned that this was not always done
    in hardirq context; presumaby the I/O completion was done in a softirq
    like SCSI. What was the motivation for moving such a long code path
    into the hard irq handler?


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.019 / U:1.728 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site