Re: [PATCH] Prevent nested interrupts when the IRQ stack is nearoverflowing v2

[Linus Torvalds]

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> NOTE! Historically, the "fast" handlers also had a much faster irq 
> response because they didn't do that whole MASK/ACK/END thing. So they'd 
> just keep the CPU interrupts disabled, and ACK at the end, and I think 
> we've even used AUTOEIO so that they didn't need any ACK at all, and we 
> never touched the interrupt controller itself for them.

Btw, it was even more extreme than that. The fast irq handlers got a 
totally separate kernel entry point, and wouldn't save all registers, only 
the compiler-clobbered ones. Which is why they then had no "struct 
pt_regs" etc.

And yes, it really mattered. Then later we got so bloated that it wasn't 
much of an issue - and just made everything more complicated.

		Linus
--
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/