Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq_work

From: Borislav Petkov
Date: Thu Jun 24 2010 - 09:20:26 EST

From: Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 03:02:34PM +0200

> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 02:35:37PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > All of these solutions use the fact that perf events are a generic event
> > framework. If there's any missing details somewhere then fixes/enhancements
> > can be added - right now our in-kernel event consumers are simple. But the
> > design is sound.
> One immediate problem that comes to mind with the proposal
> is that if the event is of a type that cannot be dropped (e.g. an error
> that needs to be handled) then a shared ring buffer cannot guarantee that.

If its a critical error you do all the handling in the kernel and you
don't need task context at all, no? Can you give an example of such an


Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Registration: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at