Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 12:46:36 +0000 From: "andrew (Andrew Turner)" <phabric-noreply@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: [Differential] [Updated] D3034: Add BUS_UNMASK_INTR method Message-ID: <626c4736eb20cb75e4f0b363bf302053@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-knxjlihey7dhpvtvtsyg-req@FreeBSD.org> References: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-knxjlihey7dhpvtvtsyg-req@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
andrew added a comment. I would like to see something like how Linux handles this. When they create interrupts they can mark them as per-core, i.e. they will be unmasked on all cores. I think we could do this with a new flag in `bus_setup_intr`. Care would need to be taken to handle devices created both before and after we have enabled the secondary cpus as I would expect the code paths to be slightly different, e.g. before enabling we would need to record the need to unmask when new cpus are brought up, after enabling we will also need to signal to the other cpus to unmask the interrupt. REPOSITORY rS FreeBSD src repository REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3034 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: wma_semihalf.com, emaste, imp, ian, zbb, andrew Cc: onwahe-gmail-com, freebsd-arm-list, meloun-miracle-cz, imp, andrew, emaste
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?626c4736eb20cb75e4f0b363bf302053>