Thread (2 messages) flat view 2 messages, 2 authors, 2015-02-04
DORMANTno replies

[PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu: use a threaded handler for context interrupts

From: Will Deacon <hidden>
Date: 2015-02-04 11:33:05
Also in: linux-iommu

On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 08:10:02PM +0000, Mitchel Humpherys wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28 2015 at 04:07:39 AM, Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
With a shared handler (e.g. a bunch of context banks have the same IRQ)
then I assume that we don't want to end up with multiple handler threads
all tripping over each other. I'd rather have one thread that handles work
queued up by multiple low-level handlers.

Do you have a preference either way?
Ok I think I understand the scenario you're describing.  If multiple
context banks are sharing an interrupt line their handlers currently
execute serially, but with threaded handlers they would all be woken up
and possibly execute concurrently.  I hadn't really considered this
because none of our targets have CBs sharing interrupts.  In any case,
the CBs that aren't interrupting should quickly return IRQ_NONE when
they notice that !(fsr & FSR_FAULT), so is this really a concern?
Well, with my stall-mode hat on, the FSR check could be done in the
low-level handler, with the actual page fault handling or whatever done
in the thread.
Anyways, we can always hold off on this until we have a more compelling
motivation for it.  For example, if we need to enable clocks to read
registers then threaded IRQs seem like the best solution.  Hopefully
I'll find time to have another go at the clocks stuff soon, which is the
real reason why we're using threaded IRQs for context interrupts in our
msm tree.
Okey doke. Having the clocks stuff supported in iommu core would be my
preference.

Will
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help