Re: x86: Is there still value in having a special tlb flush IPIvector?

[Ingo Molnar]

* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > How about using just arch_send_call_function_single_ipi() to implement
> > smp_send_reschedule() ?
> >
> > The overhead of that is a smp_mb() and a list_empty() check in
> > generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt() if there is indeed no work
> > to do.
> 
> Is doing a no-op interrupt sufficient on all architectures?  Is there 
> some change a function call IPI might not go through the normal 
> reschedule interrupt exit path?

We'd still use the smp_send_reschdule(cpu) API, so it's an architecture 
detail. On x86 we'd use arch_send_call_function_single_ipi().

	Ingo
--
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/