[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 2/3] genirq: warn about IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED at the right place
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 02:52:49 +0000 Jamie Lokier <> wrote:

> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > We can tweak and tune until we're blue in the face, but the system's
> > IRQ latency will always be worse if handlers always run with interrupts
> > disabled.
> Are you sure?
> If good, fast irq handler A runs with interrupts enabled,
> and good, fast irq handler B runs (interrupting A),
> A's latency goes _up_ not down.
> If B happens first, then you get B's latency going up, and A's latency going down.

If the hardware doesn't prioritise these interrupts then the programmer
can do so crudely, by running the critical one with interrupts disabled.

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-03-15 07:29    [W:0.044 / U:5.696 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site