xen-devel
[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migr
To: |
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them |
From: |
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Mon, 9 May 2011 13:02:47 +0100 |
Cc: |
"xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "mingo@xxxxxxxxxx" <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "hpa@xxxxxxxxx" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Mon, 09 May 2011 05:03:09 -0700 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F1505C8ED7FB9F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
References: |
<625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F1505C8ED7F7E3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1105061149330.3005@ionos> <625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F1505C8ED7F962@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105061526120.10886@kaball-desktop> <625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F1505C8ED7FB9F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
User-agent: |
Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) |
On Mon, 9 May 2011, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> yes, with your patch this issue disappears, since you explicitly make
> mask/unmask as
> a nop for xen_percpu_chip, which effectively avoids them from undesired unmask
> when doing the migration. Though it works, it's not intuitive as to me it's an
> workaround to make Xen chip implementation adapting to specific fixup_irqs
> logic.
I have been tring to follow the example of existing supported drivers.
The only x86 driver I could find that uses handle_percpu_irq is uv_irq
that does exatly the same thing.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, (continued)
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Stefano Stabellini
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Tian, Kevin
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Tian, Kevin
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them,
Stefano Stabellini <=
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Thomas Gleixner
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Tian, Kevin
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Tian, Kevin
- [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Stefano Stabellini
- Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
|
|
|