Lots of other things would have to change when that happens too. Until then
I'll take any latency improvement I can get.
On 24 Jan 2015 12:40 am, "Mark Kettenis" <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 22:52:37 +1000
> > From: David Gwynne <[email protected]>
> >
> > when a softint gets scheduled, we set a bit in the current cpus
> > cpu_info structure. that doesnt have to be an interlocked operation
> > to be locally atomic.
> >
> > ok?
>
> Hmm, but it will need to be if we ever want to have the ability to
> schedule softinterrupts on different CPUs.
>
> > Index: arch/amd64/amd64/intr.c
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/amd64/amd64/intr.c,v
> > retrieving revision 1.40
> > diff -u -p -r1.40 intr.c
> > --- arch/amd64/amd64/intr.c   6 Jan 2015 12:50:47 -0000       1.40
> > +++ arch/amd64/amd64/intr.c   23 Jan 2015 12:50:20 -0000
> > @@ -721,6 +721,6 @@ softintr(int sir)
> >  {
> >       struct cpu_info *ci = curcpu();
> >
> > -     __asm volatile("lock; orq %1, %0" :
> > +     __asm volatile("orq %1, %0" :
> >           "=m"(ci->ci_ipending) : "ir" (1UL << sir));
> >  }
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to