MESSAGE
| DATE | 2015-09-16 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [LIU Comp Sci] Fwd: Re: When to use threaded interrupts?
|
From owner-learn-outgoing-at-mrbrklyn.com Wed Sep 16 00:34:58 2015
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Received: by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix)
id 6DCEE161160; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:34:58 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: learn-outgoing-at-mrbrklyn.com
Received: by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix, from userid 28)
id 613F9161162; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:34:58 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: learn-at-nylxs.com
Received: from mailbackend.panix.com (mailbackend.panix.com [166.84.1.89])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF489161160
for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.19] (www.mrbrklyn.com [96.57.23.82])
by mailbackend.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D611117CF8
for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <55F8F171.1050705-at-panix.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:34:57 -0400
From: Ruben Safir
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: learn-at-nylxs.com
Subject: [LIU Comp Sci] Fwd: Re: When to use threaded interrupts?
References: <20150915190513.GA19292-at-kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150915190513.GA19292-at-kroah.com>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20150915190513.GA19292-at-kroah.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-learn-at-mrbrklyn.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: learn-at-mrbrklyn.com
FYI
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: When to use threaded interrupts?
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 12:05:13 -0700
From: Greg KH
To: Kosta Zertsekel
CC: Rami Rosen , kernelnewbies
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 09:02:24PM +0300, Kosta Zertsekel wrote:
> >> On 10 September 2015 at 20:49, Kosta Zertsekel
> >> Also, I see that in 4.2 there are only ~76 drivers that use threaded
> >> interrupt:
> >> ```
> >> $ git grep -l IRQ_WAKE_THREAD | sort | grep -v "\.h" | wc -l
> >> 76
> >> ```
>
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Rami Rosen wrote:
> > This kernel and older ones include device drivers which use threaded IRQs
> > (call request_threaded_irq(), etc).
> > For example, many of the driver under drivers/input/touchscreen are
> > using threaded IRQs:
> > Following link is from kernel 3.18:
> > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/input/touchscreen/ucb1400_ts.c?v
> =3.18
> >
> > How did you came to the conclusion that this kernel does not support
> > threaded IRQs ? could it be that you simply do not use device drivers
> > that use this mechanism ?
>
> In the given touch screen driver request_threaded_irq() provides NULL
> for the thread function pointer. Hence, the non-threaded IRQ mechanism
> is actually being used. This is why I grepped for IRQ_WAKE_THREAD and
> not for request_threaded_irq.
>
> So, the questions remains.
> Why only ~76 drivers use the threaded IRQ mechanism?
Because people have not converted older code to the newer mechanism.
> What are the cons of the threaded IRQ mechanism?
Slower throughput and added complexity.
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies-at-kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
|
|
