[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080220104113.GI3881@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:41:13 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tasklets: Avoid duplicating __tasklet_{,hi_}schedule()
code
* Ahmed S. Darwish <darwish.07@...il.com> wrote:
> > > - local_irq_disable();
> > > - t->next = __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list;
> > > - __get_cpu_var(tasklet_vec).list = t;
> > > - __raise_softirq_irqoff(TASKLET_SOFTIRQ);
> > > - local_irq_enable();
> > > + /* We were not lucky enough to run, reschedule. */
> > > + __tasklet_schedule(t);
> >
> > i think there's a subtle difference that you missed: this one does
> > __raise_softirq_irqoff(), while __tasklet_schedule() does a
> > raise_softirq_irqoff(). (note the lack of undescores)
> >
> > the reason is to avoid infinitely self-activating tasklets.
>
> Indeed, thanks a lot for the explanation. (maybe it's time to check
> for new eyeglasses ;)).
nah, it's rather subtle and the code looked good to me at first but i
remembered that there was some small detail here to watch out for.
i really dont like tasklets due to their many, arbitrary scheduling
limitations, we should really use the "turn tasklets into kthreads"
patch i posted last year.
Ingo
--
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