lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Threaded interrupt handling question in RT kernel
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Jaccon Bastiaansen wrote:

> Hello Thomas, Peter
>
> We have a question about threaded interrupt handling:
>
> By default, when using threaded interrupt handlers, the IRQ is
> disabled in hard IRQ context and enabled again after all threaded
> interrupt handlers connected to that IRQ have run. In this way, high
> priority interrupt handlers can be delayed until the lowest priority
> interrupt handler thread has run. Therefore it seems that it's not
> useful to have a separate thread for each interrupt handler (what's
> the use of being able to set interrupt handler thread priorities when
> you still have to wait for the one with the lowest priority).

That's correct, but RT just makes use of the general facility which is
designed to have a separate thread for each device.

> So we think that we should use the request_threaded_irq() function.

You can do that for a specific driver, but we cannot do that in RT for
every driver in the kernel.

> The task of the handler that is executed in hard IRQ context is to
> check whether the device that it controls is generating an interrupt
> and if it does, deactivate the IRQ output of the device and wakeup the
> interrupt handler thread by returning IRQ_WAKE_THREAD. By deactivating
> the IRQ output, another device connected to the same IRQ can activate
> the IRQ again before the interrupt handler thread of the first device
> has run. This guarantees that a high priority threaded interrupt
> handler of a device on a shared IRQ can run before a low priority
> threaded interrupt handler of a device on the same IRQ has run. So
> when using threaded interrupt handlers for devices on a shared IRQ,
> make sure that all drivers have used request_threaded_irq().
> Otherwise, high priority threaded interrupt handlers can be delayed by
> low priority threaded interrupt handlers.
>
> Is all this correct or do we miss something?

That's how it's designed to work.

Thanks,

tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-16 17:35    [W:0.118 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site