Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Sep 2023 10:22:57 +0800 | From | Wei Gong <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] genirq: avoid long loops in handle_edge_irq |
| |
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 05:25:24PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27 2023 at 15:53, Wei Gong wrote: > > O Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 02:28:21PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 25 2023 at 10:51, Wei Gong wrote: > >> > diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c > >> > index dc94e0bf2c94..6da455e1a692 100644 > >> > --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c > >> > +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c > >> > @@ -831,7 +831,8 @@ void handle_edge_irq(struct irq_desc *desc) > >> > handle_irq_event(desc); > >> > > >> > } while ((desc->istate & IRQS_PENDING) && > >> > - !irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data)); > >> > + !irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data) && > >> > + cpumask_test_cpu(smp_processor_id(), irq_data_get_affinity_mask(&desc->irq_data))); > >> > >> Assume affinty mask has CPU0 and CPU1 set and the loop is on CPU0, but > >> the effective affinity is on CPU1 then how is this going to move the > >> interrupt?
Can replacing irq_data_get_affinity_mask with irq_data_get_effective_affinity_mask solve this issue?
> > > > Loop is on the CPU0 means that the previous effective affinity was on CPU0. > > When the previous effective affinity is a subset of the new affinity mask, > > the effective affinity will not be updated. > > That's an implementation detail of a particular interrupt chip driver, > but not a general guaranteed behaviour. >
| |