From: Vijay Kumar <vijay.ac.kumar@oracle.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, rob.gardner@oracle.com,
anthony.yznaga@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] sparc64: Use low latency path to resume idle cpu
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 22:36:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3bb6d4bb-ebf1-1a1f-9766-b02a187cbe1e@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170721.035526.1236051430538663900.davem@davemloft.net>
On 7/20/2017 9:55 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Vijay Kumar <vijay.ac.kumar@oracle.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:44:24 -0500
>
>> I had same thoughts initially but I had to go with this approach as
>> scheduler_ipi is wrapped with irq_enter() and irq_exit(). Whereas POKE
>> resumes the cpu in process context.
>>
>> Comments in scheduler_ipi():
>>
>> * Not all reschedule IPI handlers call irq_enter/irq_exit, since
>> * traditionally all their work was done from the interrupt return
>> * path. Now that we actually do some work, we need to make sure
>> * we do call them.
>> *
>> * Some archs already do call them, luckily irq_enter/exit nest
>> * properly.
>> *
>> * Arguably we should visit all archs and update all handlers,
>> * however a fair share of IPIs are still resched only so this would
>> * somewhat pessimize the simple resched case.
>> */
>> irq_enter();
>>
> I still think we should be able to fake the state such that this
> direct schedule_ipi() call will work.
>
> I could be wrong :)
I can give a try :). But looks to me one thing that will go wrong is irq
accounting done in __irq_enter() and rcu_irq_enter().
Thanks,
Vijay
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-21 3:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-08 20:23 Vijay Kumar
2017-07-08 20:23 ` [PATCH 1/2] sparc64: Add a new hypercall CPU_POKE Vijay Kumar
2017-07-08 20:23 ` [PATCH 2/2] sparc64: Use cpu_poke to resume idle cpu Vijay Kumar
2017-07-20 19:58 ` David Miller
2017-07-21 2:47 ` Vijay Kumar
2017-07-20 19:57 ` [PATCH 0/2] sparc64: Use low latency path " David Miller
2017-07-21 2:44 ` Vijay Kumar
2017-07-21 2:55 ` David Miller
2017-07-21 3:36 ` Vijay Kumar [this message]
2017-07-21 3:45 ` David Miller
2017-07-21 4:11 ` Vijay Kumar
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=3bb6d4bb-ebf1-1a1f-9766-b02a187cbe1e@oracle.com \
--to=vijay.ac.kumar@oracle.com \
--cc=anthony.yznaga@oracle.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rob.gardner@oracle.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®