From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86-64: software IRQ masking and handling
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:39:05 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201008041139.06739.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C588C0C.1070702@goop.org>
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 07:07:16 am Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Of course if it becomes core to the x86 architecture or the kernel
> overall, then most of the irq-related paravirt-ops can go away and be
> limited to the actual interrupt handler and the machinery needed to
> really mask/unmask the hardware and set the pending flag (which would
> likely just be contained within the hypervisor-specific code, and not
> need any new kernel interfaces to replace the dropped paravirt irq ones).
Yep, we sweat over the cli/sti paravirtual implementations because it's so
common. If the kernel used soft cli/sti we could simply implement it with
a hypercall and be much happier (though iret possibly still an issue).
Cheers,
Rusty.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-04 2:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-11 18:01 Tejun Heo
2010-07-11 19:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-07-11 20:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-11 22:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-07-12 1:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-12 5:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-07-12 8:02 ` Rusty Russell
2010-07-12 7:41 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 2:19 ` Rusty Russell
2010-07-12 2:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-12 7:45 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 7:35 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 13:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-08-03 21:37 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-08-04 2:09 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
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=201008041139.06739.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.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