lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt handlers
    On Wed, 1 Oct 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:

    > On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 16:29:50 -0700
    > Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:
    >
    > > On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 16:23:33 -0700
    > > Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
    > >
    > > >
    > > > I'm a bit surprised to see that there is no facility for per-cpu
    > > > interrupt threads?
    > > >
    > >
    > > per handler is the right approach (that way, if one dies, all other
    > > interrupts will likely keep working)
    > >
    > > now.. normally an interrupt only goes to one cpu, so effectively it is
    > > per cpu already anyway
    >
    > Yes, if a) the thread was asleep when it was woken up and b) if the
    > scheduler does the right thing and wakes the thread on the CPU which
    > called wake_up().
    >
    > The ongoing sagas of tbench/mysql/volanomark regressions make me think
    > that any behaviour which we "expect" of the scheduler should be
    > triple-checked daily :(

    Yup. I missed that detail when I dusted off the moldy patches.

    Of course we need to pin the thread to the affinity mask of the
    hardware interrupt.

    /me goes back to do home work :)

    Thanks,

    tglx


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-10-02 02:01    [W:0.022 / U:29.820 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site