On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > IRQ_WORK can work w/o APIC
> >
> > Emphasis on CAN. If the APIC is available it's used, if not then there is no
> > point in setting up the gate for nothing.
> >
> > So why would your patch
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> IRQ_WORK can work w/o APIC
>
> Emphasis on CAN. If the APIC is available it's used, if not then there is no
> point in setting up the gate for nothing.
>
> So why would your patch do any good?
I understood it is no point setting up i
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Thomas Gleixner
> >> wrote:
> >> > if LOCAL_APIC is disabled it does not use the interrupt, simply because
> >> > t
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > if LOCAL_APIC is disabled it does not use the interrupt, simply because
>> > there
>> > is no way to trigger it. That setup is inside
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > if LOCAL_APIC is disabled it does not use the interrupt, simply because
> > there
> > is no way to trigger it. That setup is inside #ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
> > for
> > exactly that reason.
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> if LOCAL_APIC is disabled it does not use the interrupt, simply because there
> is no way to trigger it. That setup is inside #ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC for
> exactly that reason.
>
> Just because IRQ_WORK has no config dependency on LOCA
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Thomas Gleixner
> >> wrote:
> >> > This is pointless, because it's only called when local apic is enabled
> >> > as all
> >> > call sites of alloc_intr_gate()
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> My purpose of posting this patch set is trying to make the system vector
> layout
> reveal this fact.
>
> we have SMP system vector defined first( these may rely on or not rely
> on CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC),
>
> then comes the CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_A
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > This is pointless, because it's only called when local apic is enabled as
>> > all
>> > call sites of alloc_intr_gate() depend on CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
>>
>> Not exactly,
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > This is pointless, because it's only called when local apic is enabled as
> > all
> > call sites of alloc_intr_gate() depend on CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
>
> Not exactly, currently at least
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> This is pointless, because it's only called when local apic is enabled as all
> call sites of alloc_intr_gate() depend on CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
Not exactly, currently at least smp_intr_init() DOES NOT depend on
CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_API
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jianyu Zhan wrote:
> During native_init_IRQ(), we will update first_system_vector conditionally
> when we init system vector. But on !CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_PIC, we prefer it
> to NR_IRQS, so don't bother set it on this case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jianyu Zhan
> ---
> arch/x86/includ
During native_init_IRQ(), we will update first_system_vector conditionally
when we init system vector. But on !CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_PIC, we prefer it
to NR_IRQS, so don't bother set it on this case.
Signed-off-by: Jianyu Zhan
---
arch/x86/include/asm/desc.h | 2 ++
arch/x86/kernel/irqinit.c | 3 --
13 matches
Mail list logo
