Re: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravirt opscallsites to make them patchable

[Zachary Amsden]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Zachary Amsden wrote:
>   
> > void local_irq_restore(int enabled)
> > {
> >    pda.intr_mask = enabled;
> >    /*
> >     * note there is a window here where softirqs are not processed by
> >     * the interrupt handler, but that is not a problem, since it will
> >     * get done here in the outer enable of any nested pair.
> >     */
> >    if (enabled)
> >        local_bh_enable();
> > }
> >     
>
> Actually, this one is more complicated. You also need to actually enable 
> hardware interrupts again if they got disabled by an interrupt actually 
> occurring while the "soft-interrupt" was disabled.
>   

Actually, I was thinking the irq handlers would just not mess around 
with eflags on the stack, just call the chip to ack the interrupt and 
re-enable hardware interrupts when they left, since that is free anyway 
with the iret.  Maybe leaving irqs disabled is better.

> Anyway, it really *should* be pretty damn simple. No need to disable 
> preemption, there should be no events that can *cause* it, since all 
> interrupts get headed off at the pass.. (the return-from-interrupt thng 
> should already notice that it's returning to an interrupts-disabled 
> section and not try to do any preemption).
>   
> What did I miss?
>   

I wasn't disabling preemption to actually disable preemption.  I was 
just using bh_disable as a global hammer to stop softirqs (thus the irq 
replay tasklet) from running during the normal irq_exit path.  Then, we 
can just use the existing software IRQ replay code, and I think barely 
any new code (queue_irq(), etc) has to be written.

Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/