Thread (7 messages) 7 messages, 3 authors, 2014-01-25

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

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