Re: [PATCH RT v2] timer: Raise softirq if there's irq_work

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior]

* Steven Rostedt | 2014-01-24 15:09:33 [-0500]:

>[ Talking with Sebastian on IRC, it seems that doing the irq_work_run()
>  from the interrupt in -rt is a bad thing. Here we simply raise the
>  softirq if there's irq work to do. This too boots on my i7 ]

It is okay in general because most of the users should not run in bare
interrupt context. The only exception here is the nohz_full_kick_work
thing.

>After trying hard to figure out why my i7 box was locking up with the
>new active_timers code, that does not run the timer softirq if there
>are no active timers, I took an extra look at the softirq handler and
>noticed that it doesn't just run timer softirqs, it also runs irq work.
>
>This was the bug that was locking up the system. It wasn't missing a
>timer, it was missing irq work. By always doing the irq work callbacks,
>the system boots fine.
>
>No need to check for defined(CONFIG_IRQ_WORK). When that's not set the
>"irq_work_needs_cpu()" is a static inline that returns false.
>
>Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Thank you Steven, this makes sense.

Sebastian
--
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/