From: "Dong Feng" <middle.fengdong@gmail.com>
To: "Andi Kleen" <ak@suse.de>,
liqiang@nortel.com, 李强 <victor.liqiang@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Question on The Timer Interrupt Dispatch
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:26:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a2ebde260609130826u12a82ffy2c71dd5ec7c4f6bd@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
One question confuses me for quiet a while about the initialization of
the IO APIC.
For my understanding, in i386 architecture, the timer interrupts are
dispatched among every CPU in a roughly round-robin fashion
*immediately* (or reasonably short) after the IO APIC has been
initialized and a secondary CPU has enabled its local IRQ. Turning to
code, I suppose the first condition should be met by [init() ->
smp_prepare_cpus() -> smp_boot_cpus() -> smpboot_setup_io_apic() ->
setup_IO_APIC()], and the second condition should be met by [
start_secondary() -> local_irq_enable() ].
I tried to confirm my guess by tracing the initialization code
execution on my Dual-core laptop . However, I get very confusing
result. While both the conditions had just been met as described
above, CPU 0 has handled about 70 ticks (i.e. timer interrupt) and CPU
1 has handled 0 tick. I expected CPU 1 would get its first timer
interrupt after few ticks. But the fact is that CPU 1 has not been
interrupted by timer until CPU 0 has handled over 7000 ticks. Since
CPU 1 gets the first interrupt, the subsequent timer interrupts are
distributed on both CPU roughly equally.
I still can not find any explanation myself for the gap between my
presumption and the result from code tracing. According to the
presumption, CPU 1 should get the first interrupt while CPU 0 handles
70 ticks, but CPU 1 does not until CPU 0 handles over 7000 ticks.
Could you please pointed out which part I missed in my understanding?
Thanks.
next reply other threads:[~2006-09-13 15:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-13 15:26 Dong Feng [this message]
2006-09-14 12:47 ` Dong Feng
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=a2ebde260609130826u12a82ffy2c71dd5ec7c4f6bd@mail.gmail.com \
--to=middle.fengdong@gmail.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liqiang@nortel.com \
--cc=victor.liqiang@gmail.com \
/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®