Xen 
 
Home About Xen.org Xen Xen Summit Wiki Mailing List Bug Tracker Xen Downloads
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Interrupt forwarding

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Interrupt forwarding
From: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:53:58 -0500
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Ian Pratt <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:22:11 +0000
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=ArLXBO/QD6l8YqFkxMX3rxJin825LATwEERjH+FNu1S/tjZ6ACWYdbm5EdVAqJGwy8or2iOjOJ+09jriMa2BwAlXs53LCw7PkA2s2O159KpcJNnk+OM9JZqYJrnQ+bnn4LQ006eiSC9JrdM+pQsLmCIOhMcZjl3eYMMS1vg0DXU=
Envelope-to: xen+James.Bulpin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <f7ad8bba837b5b01bf13f789a612118f@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=xen-devel>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-id: List for Xen developers <xen-devel.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <A95E2296287EAD4EB592B5DEEFCE0E9D1E3602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <d10e560f7d2d0190ed351d1955f129c5@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <9e47339105031210332d8756f0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <f7ad8bba837b5b01bf13f789a612118f@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 18:48:53 +0000, Keir Fraser
<Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 12 Mar 2005, at 18:33, Jon Smirl wrote:
> 
> >> Shared interrupts are slightly worse because the irq won't get
> >> unmasked
> >> until all receivers say their work is done. If one lock sup it starves
> >> the rest -- until this is detected and that domain gets blown away.
> >
> > After you blow away the domain how do you acknowledge the interrupt?
> > Is all hardware required to have a tiny driver in the supervisor to
> > handling acking in this case? If you don't ack it, it is going to keep
> > interrupting.
> 
> We don't go that far. A sensible approach would be to require the
> driver to be restarted, and to reset the hardware device, before
> unmasking. Or to rate limit each interrupt line to an
> administrator-configurable 'reasonable' number of IRQs per second --
> this might also catch bugs where drivers are not properly acking
> devices for other reasons.

In x86 boxes almost everything is shared. Leaving the interrupt masked
off will probably disable 20% of the hardware in the box.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel