lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/7] xen/events: bug fixes and some diagnostic aids
Date
On 08.02.21 11:40, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Juergen,
>
> On 08/02/2021 10:22, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>> On 08.02.21 10:54, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> ... I don't really see how the difference matter here. The idea is to
>>> re-use what's already existing rather than trying to re-invent the
>>> wheel with an extra lock (or whatever we can come up).
>>
>> The difference is that the race is occurring _before_ any IRQ is
>> involved. So I don't see how modification of IRQ handling would help.
>
> Roughly our current IRQ handling flow (handle_eoi_irq()) looks like:
>
> if ( irq in progress )
> {
>   set IRQS_PENDING
>   return;
> }
>
> do
> {
>   clear IRQS_PENDING
>   handle_irq()
> } while (IRQS_PENDING is set)
>
> IRQ handling flow like handle_fasteoi_irq() looks like:
>
> if ( irq in progress )
>   return;
>
> handle_irq()
>
> The latter flow would catch "spurious" interrupt and ignore them. So it
> would handle nicely the race when changing the event affinity.

Sure? Isn't "irq in progress" being reset way before our "lateeoi" is
issued, thus having the same problem again? And I think we want to keep
the lateeoi behavior in order to be able to control event storms.


Juergen
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-keys][unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-08 13:31    [W:0.094 / U:1.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site