mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: New consolidate irqs vs . probe_irq_*()
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:20:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041020092017.GA28054@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1098262403.6278.16.camel@gaston>


* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2004-10-20 at 18:48, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > yeah. I've put it into a separate autoprobe.c file specifically for that
> > reason, you can exclude it in the Makefile and can provide your own
> > architecture version. Or should we make the no-autoprobing choice
> > generic perhaps?
> 
> I like this later option... How may archs actually had autoprobing
> implemented and actually used ?
> 
> Well, I'll do some grep'ing around tonight as I do the NO_IRQ stuff
> and see what makes more sense. I don't think an arch that didn't have
> autoprobing needs it now, besides, it's not exactly a reliable
> mecanism...

btw., auto-detection of interrupt sources is not _necessarily_ broken. 
Especially with level-triggered interrupts (where no active irq source
can get lost) it can be doable and reliable. (Here i dont mean the
probe_irq_on/off interface, but the concept of auto-detection.)

Alan has a very neat hack that fixes laptop BIOS breakage in associating
a screaming interrupt with the driver that responds to it with
IRQ_HANDLED, by probing through all the SHIRQ handlers and checking
whether the return code is IRQ_HANDLED. (this patch was in -mm but has
not been integrated into the generic irq subsystem yet.) This patch
turned a broken-under-Linux into a working laptop so we cannot ignore
it.

In theory, as long as all drivers involved are shared-irq-capable, and
all interrupts are level-triggered and get repeated if unhandled, we can
always do this kinds of driver-feedback-based irq vector discovery.

Think about the positive effects: in theory we could even boot into a
box without _any_ BIOS interrupt info whatsoever, assuming only a few
architecture basics like the identity of the timer interrupt.
Furthermore, if the BIOS reports _bad_ interrupt information, we can
detect & redirect that interrupt to the driver that responds to it.

this is not a concept that would be too useful for the server space, but
it sure could be useful for the produce-and-forget PC mass-market. We
are playing a constant and mostly losing catchup game with BIOS quirks.

what can never work fully reliably is of course what the feature was
used for primarily: ISA :-) One-time edge-triggered interrupts that get
lost are nasty ...

so i thought autodetect.c could survive in the generic code - maybe we
can make something really nice out of it, based on Alan's patch.

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-20  9:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-20  7:08 [PATCH] Fix PREEMPT_ACTIVE definition Paul Mackerras
2004-10-20  8:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20  8:42   ` New consolidate irqs vs . probe_irq_*() Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20  8:48     ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-20  8:53       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20  9:20         ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2004-10-20 10:56           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20  9:31       ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-10-20  9:01     ` Russell King
2004-10-20 10:50       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 11:01         ` Russell King
2004-10-20 11:06           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-10-20 11:53           ` Paul Mackerras
2004-10-20 12:31             ` Russell King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20041020092017.GA28054@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome