public inbox for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale•com>
To: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel•crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba•org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qe_ic: Do a sync when masking interrupts.
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 13:22:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <453D0881.500@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E8190CD2-1898-473E-812A-AE2CBD85D73A@kernel.crashing.org>

Kumar Gala wrote:
> 
> On Oct 23, 2006, at 10:19 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> Possibly -- but the only problem on the rare occasions where the  timing
>> is not fortuitous is a spurious interrupt; the only reason the sync
>> needs to be there at all is to avoid the overhead of the extra  interrupt
>> (and to avoid user complaints that they're getting "BAD" interrupts).
> 
> 
> Why wouldn't the read accomplish the same thing in a more robust way  
> than the sync?

It would.  However, it also adds a small amount of overhead to every QE 
interrupt, and the only thing that that overhead buys is avoiding 
possible but empirically very rare spurious interrupts; it'd cost more 
than simply accepting that a spurious interrupt might happen once in a 
great while.

Without any type of sync, spurious interrupts happen fairly regularly 
(about 5-10% of legitimate interrupts), so adding the sync should be a 
net gain over doing nothing.

If the consensus is that a read should be done anyway, I can resumbit 
the patch that way; I just think it's overkill given that a 100% 
guarantee isn't required for correctness.

-Scott

  reply	other threads:[~2006-10-23 18:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-19 18:03 [PATCH] qe_ic: Do a sync when masking interrupts Scott Wood
2006-10-20  3:03 ` Li Yang-r58472
2006-10-23  3:59 ` Paul Mackerras
2006-10-23  9:35   ` Li Yang-r58472
2006-10-23 15:19   ` Scott Wood
2006-10-23 15:29     ` Scott Wood
2006-10-23 17:52     ` Kumar Gala
2006-10-23 18:22       ` Scott Wood [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-23 15:30 Michael R. Zucca
2006-10-23 16:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-10-23 18:27   ` Scott Wood
2006-10-23 18:46     ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-10-24  7:17     ` Li Yang-r58472
2006-10-25  3:51       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-10-25  4:47         ` Liu Dave-r63238
2006-10-23 18:53 Scott Wood

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=453D0881.500@freescale.com \
    --to=scottwood@freescale$(echo .)com \
    --cc=galak@kernel$(echo .)crashing.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
    --cc=paulus@samba$(echo .)org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox