lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86: Don't ack_APIC_irq() if lapic is disabled in GENERIC_INTERRUPT_VECTOR handler

* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:

> [Ingo Molnar - Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 08:06:32PM +0200]
> |
> | * Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> |
> | > Otherwise would cause trouble...
> | >
> | > Cc: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
> | > Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>
> | > ---
> | > arch/x86/kernel/irq.c | 3 ++-
> | > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> | >
> | > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> | > index b0cdde6..78b23d0 100644
> | > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> | > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> | > @@ -257,7 +257,8 @@ void smp_generic_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs)
> | > {
> | > struct pt_regs *old_regs = set_irq_regs(regs);
> | >
> | > - ack_APIC_irq();
> | > + if (!disable_apic)
> | > + ack_APIC_irq();
> |
> | Wont in that case the apic->ack method be a NOP?
> |
> | Ingo
> |
>
> iirc it was Xen related patch. So it's not that simple.
>
> I've pointed out Sheng about disable_apic. I'm not Xen
> specialist but Xen team seem to use specific apic setup
> so our "dummy" operations are not involved (case they
> set disable_apic=1 without "turn off" apic ops in real).
> Something like that.

They should then set a NOP function in that case. We really dont want to
slow down hotpath functions like smp_generic_interrupt() with flaggery.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-20 20:25    [W:0.031 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site