[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1193835989.27652.207.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:06:29 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@....uio.no
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/33] mm: allow PF_MEMALLOC from softirq context
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 21:49 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 October 2007 21:42, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 14:51 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 31 October 2007 03:04, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > Allow PF_MEMALLOC to be set in softirq context. When running softirqs
> > > > from a borrowed context save current->flags, ksoftirqd will have its
> > > > own task_struct.
> > >
> > > What's this for? Why would ksoftirqd pick up PF_MEMALLOC? (I guess
> > > that some networking thing must be picking it up in a subsequent patch,
> > > but I'm too lazy to look!)... Again, can you have more of a rationale in
> > > your patch headers, or ref the patch that uses it... thanks
> >
> > Right, I knew I was forgetting something in these changelogs.
> >
> > The network stack does quite a bit of packet processing from softirq
> > context. Once you start swapping over network, some of the packets want
> > to be processed under PF_MEMALLOC.
>
> Hmm... what about processing from interrupt context?
From what I could tell that is not done, ISR just fills the skb and
sticks it on an RX queue to be further processed by the softirq.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists