[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: Implement dynamic allocation of irq descriptors
On 23/02/15 16:40, Vijay Kilari wrote: > Hi Julien, > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 23/02/15 16:09, Vijay Kilari wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> Hello Vijay, >>>> >>>> On 23/02/15 13:04, Vijay Kilari wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 19/02/15 07:17, vijay.kilari@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>>>>> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For arm memory for 1024 irq descriptors are allocated >>>>>>> statically irrespective of number of interrupt supported >>>>>>> by the platform. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With this patch, irq descriptors are allocated at run time >>>>>>> and managed using red-black tree. Functions to insert, search >>>>>>> and delete irq descriptor are implemented in xen/common/irq.c. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think we may want to allocate SPIs/SGIs/PPIs at boot time. This number >>>>>> will never change. We can avoid to always to allocate 1024 IRQs by using >>>>>> the number provided by the GIC. >>>>> >>>>> The irq descriptor is allocated when platform_get_irq() is called or >>>>> route_irq_to_guest() >>>>> only. So we are not allocating based on GIC. >>>> >>>> You didn't understand what I said... I was suggesting to allocate SPIs >>>> at boot time. Using an array for them allow us to access to IRQ desc in >>>> constant time. This may help interrupt latency. >>> >>> Yes, I have thought about it. May be we can choose this approach for SPIs >>> but for LPI's, the GIC can support upto ~32K. So in this case it won't make >>> sense for LPI's >> >> Again... I never said it was a bad idea for LPIs. I was only point out >> that it may not be worth for SPIs. >> >> [..] >> >>>> I think we should consider to create a separate structure for LPI's. >>> >>> Yes, I have created separate structure for LPI's for ITS driver. >>> But as I said LPI's are to many, so cannot allocate at domain creation. >> >> Ditto. The new structure can be a radix tree. I never suggested to use >> an array. > > Thanks for your suggestions. Are u refering to Radix or rb tree? Radix is better to store sparse array. I haven't really think which tree structure is better for this use case. Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |