Eric,
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 07:40:53AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Still in any of those I don't see a problem with switching to edge
> triggered mode and then back again. Either Remote IRR will keep
> it's current state or it will be cleared. Remote IRR should not
> get set (when it was clear) by such a procedure because that
> would mess up the normal interrupt enable sequence that happens
> on boot. So I'm pretty certain toggling the edge bit is harmless
> and it may actually clear Remote IRR for us.
...
>
> I think going more the way that this code has gone on arch/i386 with
> real functions is preferable.
There is an issue with this suggestion. We have an inflight
EOI broadcast msg to this IOAPIC (that got delayed but still alive) and
that can cause problem if we use edge and back to level to reset remote IRR bit.
If the vector number stays same during irq migration and if we reset remote
IRR bit using the above method(edge and then back to level) during
irq migration, then we have a problem. A new interrupt arriving on a new
cpu will set the remote IRR bit and now the old inflight EOI broadcast
reaches IOAPIC RTE(resetting the remote IRR bit, because the vector in the
broadcast msg is same), while the kernel code still assumes that the remote
IRR bit is still set. This will lead to more problems and issues.
thanks,
suresh
-
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]
