Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq_work
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Thu Jun 24 2010 - 07:20:49 EST
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:10:52PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:08 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > And I really want hardirq context for perf callbacks, some code actually
> > > relies on it (I used to have the fallback in the timer softirq and that
> > Surely that could be fixed? *requiring* hard irq context sounds weird.
> possibly, but there is no reason what so ever to use softirq here.
Ok so going back to the original self-irq patchkit. Unfortunately the other
reviewer hated that. How to get out of that deadlock?
> > > broke thing at some point).
> > I have one case that needs to sleep (but only when interrupting user code)
> > They key thing in it really is to switch stacks back to process.
> softirq can't sleep either, you need a trampoline anywa
Not true, when you interrupt ring 3 it can sleep. You just need to make
sure to run on the right stack and fix up any irq counters.
Anyways this can be solved in a different way too, it would just fit
in there too.
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
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/