On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 03:51:23PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: > > > > Now the distinct difference between arch_irq_work_raise() and > > arch_send_call_function_single_ipi() is that arch_irq_work_raise() > > should be NMI-safe. > > Ok - so when I implement interrupt priorities (aka NMI for ARC), this needs to be > highest. So on x86 the issue is that the NMI can interrupt someone else writing to the lapic. So there's a bit of extra care to be taken. If your platform doesn't suffer such issues, then that should be fine. The only requirement for irq_work is that it runs after the NMI completes and runs from regular IRQ context. There are no strict interrupt priority requirements, only that it happens. > > I seem to have forgotten the status of NMIs on ARC, but this is > > something to make a note of. > > Not had a chance to go back to it since we last discussed. > I've just been swamped with bug fixing like this one :-( Yeah, I'm familiar with the problem ... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
