Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752779AbYJAX7f (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 19:59:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751384AbYJAX71 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 19:59:27 -0400 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:34507 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750967AbYJAX70 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 19:59:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 01:58:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Andrew Morton cc: Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu, benh@kernel.crashing.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, jonathan@jonmasters.org, sdietrich@suse.de Subject: Re: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt handlers In-Reply-To: <20081001164013.f72036c9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20081001223213.078984344@linutronix.de> <20081001162333.e1509240.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081001162950.61887d08@infradead.org> <20081001164013.f72036c9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (LFD 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1337 Lines: 42 On Wed, 1 Oct 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 16:29:50 -0700 > Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 16:23:33 -0700 > > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm a bit surprised to see that there is no facility for per-cpu > > > interrupt threads? > > > > > > > per handler is the right approach (that way, if one dies, all other > > interrupts will likely keep working) > > > > now.. normally an interrupt only goes to one cpu, so effectively it is > > per cpu already anyway > > Yes, if a) the thread was asleep when it was woken up and b) if the > scheduler does the right thing and wakes the thread on the CPU which > called wake_up(). > > The ongoing sagas of tbench/mysql/volanomark regressions make me think > that any behaviour which we "expect" of the scheduler should be > triple-checked daily :( Yup. I missed that detail when I dusted off the moldy patches. Of course we need to pin the thread to the affinity mask of the hardware interrupt. /me goes back to do home work :) Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/