Hello.
Ingo Molnar wrote:
i'm hacking up something now to see whether it makes sense to
introduce a central threaded flow type, or whether it's better the
branch off the current flow types (as the code does it right now).
ok, a central flow type caused more problems than good - the main
complication is that the handler needs to know the true 'flow'
(edge/level/fasteoi, etc.) anyway, even in the threaded case.
So i rather went on making the existing flow handlers more
threading-friendly, and undoing the x86_64 and i386 arch changes to make
sure that the default handlers all work fine. Does the patch below
(against -rt4) do the trick for your on PPC too?
Not without my patch.
Ingo
Index: linux/arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c
+++ linux/arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c
@@ -1272,22 +1272,12 @@ static struct irq_chip ioapic_chip;
static void ioapic_register_intr(int irq, int vector, unsigned long trigger)
{
if ((trigger == IOAPIC_AUTO && IO_APIC_irq_trigger(irq)) ||
- trigger == IOAPIC_LEVEL) {
-#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_HARDIRQS
+ trigger == IOAPIC_LEVEL)
set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
- handle_level_irq, "level-threaded");
-#else
- set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
- handle_fasteoi_irq, "fasteoi");
-#endif
- } else {
-#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_HARDIRQS
+ handle_fasteoi_irq, "fasteoi");
+ else {
set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
- handle_edge_irq, "edge-threaded");
-#else
- set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
- handle_edge_irq, "edge");
-#endif
+ handle_edge_irq, "edge");
Hm, why force edge flow on edge-triggered IRQs?
}
set_intr_gate(vector, interrupt[irq]);
}
Index: linux/arch/x86_64/kernel/io_apic.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/arch/x86_64/kernel/io_apic.c
+++ linux/arch/x86_64/kernel/io_apic.c
@@ -787,22 +787,12 @@ static struct irq_chip ioapic_chip;
static void ioapic_register_intr(int irq, int vector, unsigned long trigger)
{
if ((trigger == IOAPIC_AUTO && IO_APIC_irq_trigger(irq)) ||
- trigger == IOAPIC_LEVEL) {
-#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_HARDIRQS
- set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
- handle_level_irq, "level-threaded");
-#else
+ trigger == IOAPIC_LEVEL)
set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
handle_fasteoi_irq, "fasteoi");
-#endif
- } else {
-#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_HARDIRQS
- set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
- handle_edge_irq, "edge-threaded");
-#else
+ else {
set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &ioapic_chip,
handle_edge_irq, "edge");
Same here...
-#endif
}
}
Index: linux/kernel/irq/chip.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/irq/chip.c
+++ linux/kernel/irq/chip.c
@@ -238,8 +238,10 @@ static inline void mask_ack_irq(struct i
if (desc->chip->mask_ack)
desc->chip->mask_ack(irq);
else {
- desc->chip->mask(irq);
- desc->chip->ack(irq);
+ if (desc->chip->mask)
+ desc->chip->mask(irq);
+ if (desc->chip->mask)
+ desc->chip->ack(irq);
}
}
Hmm, that just won't do for PPC threaded fasteoi flows! What you'll get is
a threaded IRQ with EOI *never ever* issued, unless my PPC patch is also in...
WBR, Sergei
-
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]