RE: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-15 Thread Stephen Warren
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Chubb > > "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> The scenario I'm thinking about with these patches are things like > >> low-latency user-level networking between nodes in a cluster, where > >> for good perfor

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-15 Thread Alan Cox
On Maw, 2005-03-15 at 04:32, Lee Revell wrote: > This seems sufficient for the simplest devices, that just have an > IRQ_PENDING and an IRQ_ACK register. But what about a device like the > emu10k1 where you have a half loop and loop interrupt for each of 64 > channels, plus about 10 other interrup

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-14 Thread Lee Revell
On Sat, 2005-03-12 at 21:03 -0500, Jon Smirl wrote: > On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:14:13 +, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I posted a proposal for this sometime ago because X has some uses for > > it. The idea being you'd pass a struct that describes > > > > 1. What tells you an IRQ oc

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-14 Thread Peter Chubb
> "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Jon> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:47:42 +1100, Peter Chubb Jon> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What I really want to do is deprivilege the driver code as much as >> possible. Whatever a driver does, the rest of the system should >> keep going. That w

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-14 Thread Jon Smirl
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:47:42 +1100, Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What I really want to do is deprivilege the driver code as much as > possible. Whatever a driver does, the rest of the system should keep > going. That way malicious or buggy drivers can only affect the > processes that

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-14 Thread Peter Chubb
> "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Jon> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:42:27 +1100, Peter Chubb Jon> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> >> The scenario I'm thinking about with these patches are things >> like >> low-latency user-leve

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-14 Thread Jon Smirl
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:42:27 +1100, Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> The scenario I'm thinking about with these patches are things like > >> low-latency user-level networking between nodes in a cluster, where > >> for good perfor

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-14 Thread Jon Smirl
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:33:31 +, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Llu, 2005-03-14 at 00:02, Peter Chubb wrote: > > I can see there'd be problems if the code allowed shared interrupts, > > but it doesn't. > > If you don't allow shared IRQ's its useless, if you do allow shared > IRQ's it

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-14 Thread Alan Cox
On Llu, 2005-03-14 at 00:02, Peter Chubb wrote: > I can see there'd be problems if the code allowed shared interrupts, > but it doesn't. If you don't allow shared IRQ's its useless, if you do allow shared IRQ's it deadlocks. Take your pick 8) As to your comment about needing to do a few more I/O

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Jon Smirl
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:42:27 +1100, Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> The scenario I'm thinking about with these patches are things like > >> low-latency user-level networking between nodes in a cluster, where > >> for good perfor

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Jon Smirl
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:11:18 -0700 (MST), Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan's proposal sounds very plausible and additionally if we find that > we have an irq line screaming we could use the same supplied information > to disable userspace interrupt handled devices first. I like it

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Peter Chubb
> "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Jon> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:42:27 +1100, Peter Chubb Jon> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> >> The scenario I'm thinking about with these patches are things >> like >> low-latency user-leve

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Peter Chubb
> "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Jon> On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:11:18 -0700 (MST), Zwane Mwaikambo Jon> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Alan's proposal sounds very plausible and additionally if we find >> that we have an irq line screaming we could use the same supplied >> informati

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Jon Smirl
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:39:00 +1100, Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Jon> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:29:20 +0100, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Jon> wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> > As many of you will be aware, we've been working on > >

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Peter Chubb
> "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The scenario I'm thinking about with these patches are things like >> low-latency user-level networking between nodes in a cluster, where >> for good performance even with a kernel driver you don't want to >> share your interrupt line with a

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Peter Chubb
> "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Jon> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:29:20 +0100, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jon> wrote: >> Hi! >> >> > As many of you will be aware, we've been working on >> infrastructure for > user-mode PCI and other drivers. The first >> step is to be able t

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Peter Chubb
> "Jon" == Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Jon> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:36:10 +1100, Peter Chubb Jon> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> As many of you will be aware, we've been working on infrastructure >> for user-mode PCI and other drivers. The first step is to be able >> to handle interr

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-13 Thread Peter Chubb
On Gwe, 2005-03-11 at 03:36, Peter Chubb wrote: > +static irqreturn_t irq_proc_irq_handler(int irq, void *vidp, struct pt_regs > *regs) > +{ > + struct irq_proc *idp = (struct irq_proc *)vidp; > + > + BUG_ON(idp->irq != irq); > + disable_irq_nosync(irq); > + atomic_inc(&idp->coun

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-12 Thread Jon Smirl
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:14:13 +, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I posted a proposal for this sometime ago because X has some uses for > it. The idea being you'd pass a struct that describes > > 1. What tells you an IRQ occurred on this device > 2. How to clear it > 3. How

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-12 Thread Jon Smirl
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:27:25 -0500, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Xen just posted patches for using kgdb between two instances but I > don't see how they get out of the interrupt acknowledge problem > either. I just talked to the Xen people. They don't have a solution either. They did poi

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-12 Thread Zwane Mwaikambo
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005, Jon Smirl wrote: > On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:36:10 +1100, Peter Chubb > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > As many of you will be aware, we've been working on infrastructure for > > user-mode PCI and other drivers. The first step is to be able to > > handle interrupts from user

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-12 Thread Jon Smirl
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:29:20 +0100, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > > As many of you will be aware, we've been working on infrastructure for > > user-mode PCI and other drivers. The first step is to be able to > > handle interrupts from user space. Subsequent patches add > > inf

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-12 Thread Jon Smirl
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:36:10 +1100, Peter Chubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As many of you will be aware, we've been working on infrastructure for > user-mode PCI and other drivers. The first step is to be able to > handle interrupts from user space. Subsequent patches add > infrastructure for

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-11 Thread Alan Cox
On Gwe, 2005-03-11 at 03:36, Peter Chubb wrote: > +static irqreturn_t irq_proc_irq_handler(int irq, void *vidp, struct pt_regs > *regs) > +{ > + struct irq_proc *idp = (struct irq_proc *)vidp; > + > + BUG_ON(idp->irq != irq); > + disable_irq_nosync(irq); > + atomic_inc(&idp->count

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-11 Thread Michael Raymond
We have some customers doing high performance raw I/O from various PCI & VME cards. They can already mmap() and do DMA from user space to the cards. Allowing them to do interrupt processing in user space allows them to keep everything in one tight package. The ULI web site talks about this a

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-11 Thread Greg KH
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 07:50:32AM -0600, Michael Raymond wrote: > I have many users asking for something like this. Why would a "user" care about this? Now hardware companies that want to write closed drivers is another thing :) thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the li

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-11 Thread Michael Raymond
I have many users asking for something like this. Peter's approach is simple and it appears to solve the problem for many situations. With that in mind though, for a more complicated but higher performing approach please take a look at the User Level Interrupt (ULI) project at http://oss.s

Re: User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-11 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > As many of you will be aware, we've been working on infrastructure for > user-mode PCI and other drivers. The first step is to be able to > handle interrupts from user space. Subsequent patches add > infrastructure for setting up DMA for PCI devices. > > The user-level interrupt code doesn

User mode drivers: part 1, interrupt handling (patch for 2.6.11)

2005-03-10 Thread Peter Chubb
As many of you will be aware, we've been working on infrastructure for user-mode PCI and other drivers. The first step is to be able to handle interrupts from user space. Subsequent patches add infrastructure for setting up DMA for PCI devices. The user-level interrupt code doesn't depend on the