Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:05:06 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, current@FreeBSD.org, Julian Elischer <julian@FreeBSD.org>, Jun Kuriyama <kuriyama@imgsrc.co.jp>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk> Subject: Re: Problems with interrupts on -current. Message-ID: <3BAC2A12.8F67C573@mindspring.com> References: <XFMail.010921120014.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote: > The problem is that during a fast interrupt handler, we don't acknowledge the > interrupt until we return from the interrupt handler, so if we preempt it may > be a while before we get back to the interrupted process so it can finish the > interrupt handler and ack the interrupt in the PIC. I think that you're also going to find some overhead problems related to interrupt threads when it comes to NETISR running in a seperate thread, as well. If nothing else, you are going to be paying an additional context switch overhead to switch to the NETISR thread that you weren't paying before. I don't really buy Julian's "IDE stack depth" worst case argument: the fix for that is to fix the IDE drivers to not suck up huge chunks of stack to do their work. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BAC2A12.8F67C573>