Re: mutex vs. local irqs (Was: 2.6.18 -mm merge plans)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]> wrote:

> during boot). In addition to that, archs need to add something to their
> actual interrupt entry:
> 
> 	if (no_irq_boot) {
> 		local_irq_disable();
> 		return;
> 	}

that just moves the suckage from the mutex-debugging slowpath to the 
irq-handling hotpath. (at which point i still prefer to have that in the 
mutex-debugging path)

a better solution would be to install boot-time IRQ vectors that just do
nothing but return. They dont mask, they dont ACK nor EOI - they just
return. The only thing that could break this is a screaming interrupt,
and even that one probably just slows things down a tiny bit until we
get so far in the init sequence to set up the PIC.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux