On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:56:11AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
...
> this changes the picture completely and makes the IO-APIC/local-APIC hw
> retrigger code/logic the main suspect. I think you right that it's quite
> bogus to hw-retrigger level irqs, and that could be confusing the
> IO-APIC (or the local APIC, or both).
>
> and i think i see why my first sw-resend patch didnt do the trick:
>
> > > - if (!desc->chip || !desc->chip->retrigger ||
> > > - !desc->chip->retrigger(irq)) {
> > > + if (desc->handle_irq == handle_edge_irq) {
> > > + if (desc->chip->retrigger)
> > > + desc->chip->retrigger(irq);
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND
>
> we used the hw-resend method unconditionally, right?
Right: unconditionally on a condition they are not edges...
But, since not resending at all seems to work so good in testing,
I thought, _SW_RESEND could be considered as an unnecessarily
complicated alternative.
Now, I'm a bit confused...
Jarek P.
-
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]
