On 01/18/2014 07:21 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sat, 2014-01-18 at 13:44 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:46:06AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> >>> I hope it doesn't look quite like that, next-20140117 is -ENOBOOT on >>> Q6600 box. See below for an alternative. >> >> Urgh, I see, we call the idle arch_cpu_idle() callback with irqs >> disabled. >> >> Could something like this work? >> >> local_irq_enable(); >> mwait_idle_with_hints(0,0); >> >> The interrupt enable window is slightly larger, but I'm not immediately >> seeing a problem with that. > > Yup, works just fine. Less is more. > > Nice to see a _progression_ in the pipe too btw. > This means an interrupt window is open and we can take an interrupt between checking need_resched and the MWAIT, which couldn't happen with __sti_mwait(). Are we sure that is actually safe? -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
