Re: [PATCH RT v2] timer: Raise softirq if there's irq_work
From: Paul E. McKenney <hidden>
Date: 2014-01-25 00:25:40
Also in:
lkml
From: Paul E. McKenney <hidden>
Date: 2014-01-25 00:25:40
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 03:35:42PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 21:20:39 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
* Steven Rostedt | 2014-01-24 15:09:33 [-0500]:quoted
[ Talking with Sebastian on IRC, it seems that doing the irq_work_run() from the interrupt in -rt is a bad thing. Here we simply raise the softirq if there's irq work to do. This too boots on my i7 ]It is okay in general because most of the users should not run in bare interrupt context. The only exception here is the nohz_full_kick_work thing.I know we discussed this on IRC, but I wanted to publicly state that the missing irq work callback was the RCU's rsp_wakeup() function.
Failing to invoke rsp_wakeup() when it was needed could potentially stop RCU grace periods from happening, so having rsp_wakeup() happen when it is needed is pretty important... But I would guess that you knew that already. ;-) Thanx, Paul