Re: [RFC -tip] x86: do_IRQ - send APIC EOI for x86-32 on irqwithout handler v3

[Ingo Molnar]

* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo, I've checked the sources and as far as I see
> we could NOP'ify apic->write indeed but I have
> an internal feeling that this will bring us more problem
> in future (for example it could be the following scenario:
> some screwed APIC would require cleaning of LVT's or
> IRR after resume regardless if it was initialized
> or not at all). Mostly I mean that the idea of making
> apic->write NOP'ified is quite elegant indeed but
> cut off the subset of apic operations (we need
> apic->read anyway) somehow bothering me from inside :)

it's as if assigned a special type of 'dummy apic' struct apic. It 
wont cause problems down the line: we use the new APIC driver 
infrastructure to abstract out quirks.

one small detail:

> +/* Ack APIC irq if it's enabled only */
> +static inline void ack_APIC_irq_safe(void)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
> +	if (cpu_has_apic)
> +		ack_APIC_irq();
> +#endif

we dont need the cpu_has_apic check there, do we? In the 
!cpu_has_apic the ->write method should be a dummy.

> -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> -		if (!disable_apic)
> -			ack_APIC_irq();
> -#endif
> -
> +		ack_APIC_irq_safe();

Please keep the ack_APIC_irq() name - it is inherently safe to call 
it if we always give it a meaningful ->write method.

	Ingo
--
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/