Re: [PATCH 1/3] Separate IRQ-stacks from 4K-stacks option

[Andrea Arcangeli]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:15:16PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> I was thinking of X, not audio.  This might be a problem for AV

sure I got it, maybe I wasn't clear but I wasn't in disagrement with
you, I've never said IDE is right taking 3msec, I just taken the example
you made, to add some more comment from a different point of view. Right
now IDE takes 3 msec, we can turn it down to 1msec (or better move it to
bh handler) but still nesting can be beneficial. It's up to the lowlevel
driver to re-enable irqs if it's doing something that takes a long time.
If we want to do something global that would be a nesting-max-limit
(which is a sort of requirement with 4k stack IMHO), not a no-nesting,
since no-nesting can be already enforced by every single irq handler,
and clearly many are re-enabling irqs like IDE since they take a long
time. Every time an irq handlers re-enable irqs means it's _asking_ for
nesting to happen.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/