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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans