undefined

points

[-]

FWIW, just having a mask in the interrupt controller is normally enough to give you the same thing at the cost of a dozen or so cycles in the critical path. Basically you just keep a mask per priority that can be built up cheaply at init time (or even compile time if you're cute about it), you apply the appropriate mask in the interrupt prologues and epilogues, and pretty much as soon as you apply the new mask in the prologue you go ahead and acknowledge the interrupt.

by amluto8 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

You can do this on x86 as well at a cost a merely tens to hundreds (possibly lots of hundreds) of thousands of cycles. This is part of why x86 is so popular in the embedded space.

(I’m being sarcastic, obviously. x86 interrupts and interrupt returns are hilariously slow. FRED may improve this by quite a bit.)

by vlovich1232 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

But you’re also comparing dozens of cycles at 10mhz to 100ks at 5ghz. That’s probably comparable in terms of wall clock, no?

by nomel5 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

What's the technical reason for them being slow? Book keeping with caches or something?

by monocasa5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Mostly tons of speculative state that needs to be unwound, combined with spectre mitigations, plus tons of committed state that the interrupt prologue needs to save, plus a huge song and dance to do that correctly (that FRED should help with).

All combined with the fact that there's a good chance the memory the interrupt handler is going to touch isn't in the cached working set anymore, both in the actual L* caches and in subtler places like the branch predictors and TLBs.

by amluto2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

You’re missing the big ones: both the interrupt delivery and the IRET (interrupt return) mechanisms use incredibly complicated data structures to determine what the new state should be. They need to dig around in the IDT, the GDT, the TSS and possibly the LDT to find all the register values they need to set, and they need to handle all kinds of backwards compatibility. And they “serialize”, which is an extra heavyweight fence, although that only likely accounts for a few hundred cycles in each direction.

Check out the pseudocode in the SDM — there are pages of it, and the pseudocode isn’t even complete.

FRED simplifies the state transitions such that the new state is mostly a foregone conclusion based on MSR contents.

by rkagerer4 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Thanks. Surely this was a performance hit even before Spectre?

Also, any good technical resources that concisely describe FRED?

I found this, which isn't bad but it's a bit more dumbed down than I'd like: https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-adopts-f...

by topspin9 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I am aware. That "dozen or so" is a problem: when everything is an interrupt, there are no interrupts: it's just scheduling, and things that must be scheduled frequently can't suffer "a dozen or so" overhead. For the SRP model to really hum, you need the silicon that solves this.

by monocasa9 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I've found that it doesn't matter except for something that you want at the absolute highest priority anyway, which then by definition doesn't need to jump through the same hoops because nothing can preempt it anyway.

by jacquesm5 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

> One approach is to do everything in ISRs, a la RTIC.

That only works for really simple systems. On more complex systems there is a pretty good chance you will end up with locked up hardware if your ISR is long enough. Interrupts need servicing to keep the data flowing, prioritization is a job for the OS, not the hardware.

by monocasa5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

The model works pretty well up to much larger systems than you'd expect.

If a particular interrupt has a hard real time constraint, it sounds like a great candidate for a higher priority interrupt which will let it meet that requirement.

The biggest constraint is that this is really a single core model. You need something different if you go to SMP. Though there, AMP where the main core runs this 'interrrupt controller is your scheduler' scheme, and the other cores run against a work stealing scheduler for compute bound work items still is a very nice system to program against.

by mrheosuper3 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

How would it handle kernel/user space if everything runs inside ISR context ?