Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758193AbYKDQ4j (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 11:56:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756739AbYKDQ4O (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 11:56:14 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:34224 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755732AbYKDQ4O (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 11:56:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 17:55:48 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Alexander van Heukelum Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov , Alexander van Heukelum , LKML , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , lguest@ozlabs.org, jeremy@xensource.com, Steven Rostedt , Mike Travis Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes Message-ID: <20081104165548.GA696@elte.hu> References: <20081104122839.GA22864@mailshack.com> <20081104150729.GC21470@localhost> <1225813659.22738.1282932197@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20081104163636.GA20534@elte.hu> <1225817106.2795.1282945873@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20081104165409.GA511@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081104165409.GA511@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE RBL: Envelope sender in blackholes.securitysage.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1189 Lines: 31 * Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Alexander van Heukelum wrote: > > > > My estimation is that if we do it right, your approach will behave > > > better on modern CPUs (which is what matters most for such > > > things), especially on real workloads where there's a considerable > > > instruction-cache pressure. But it should be measured in any case. > > > > Fully agreed. I will do some measurements in the near future, maybe > > next week. At least noone came up with an absolutely blocking > > problem with this approach ;). > > how about "it does not build with lguest enabled" as a blocking > problem? ;-) > > arch/x86/lguest/built-in.o: In function `lguest_init_IRQ': > boot.c:(.init.text+0x33f): undefined reference to `interrupt' > > config attached. ... other than that it booted fine on a few testboxes here. That's still not an exhaustive test by any means, but it's promising. Ingo -- 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/