[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071123200913.GE19691@waste.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 14:09:13 -0600
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:54:11PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:41:39PM -0600, Matt Mackall (mpm@...enic.com) wrote:
> > Here's another thought: move all this logic into the networking core,
> > unify it with current softirq zapper, then allow it to be called from
> > various other places (like atomic allocators). Then it'll all be in
> > central maintained place with more users.
>
> This can be done quite easily - put a check into __kfree_skb() if
> netpoll is compiled-in and we are in hardirq context, then put skb
> into softirq freeing queue. Then zap_completion_queue() can free
> anything without ever knowing about nature of the packet, since this
> will be checked in __kfree_skb() anyway.
What I had in mind was moving the whole zap_completion_queue concept
into net/core/skbuff. So that netpoll (and, say, atomic kmalloc) can
simply call something like "clean_completion_queue".
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists