[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53488291.1040501@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:02:25 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jbenc@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softirq: punt to ksoftirqd if __do_softirq recently looped
On 04/11/2014 04:33 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:57:06 -0400
>
>> @@ -330,7 +334,11 @@ void irq_enter(void)
>>
>> static inline void invoke_softirq(void)
>> {
>> - if (!force_irqthreads) {
>> + /*
>> + * If force_irqthreads is set, or if we looped in __do_softirq this
>> + * jiffie, punt to ksoftirqd to prevent userland starvation.
>> + */
>> + if (!force_irqthreads && this_cpu_read(softirq_looped) != jiffies) {
>
> If we do this, which I'm not convinced of yet, I think we should use two
> jiffies as the cutoff.
I am not fully convinced, either. This patch mostly just illustrates
the problem, and gives something that solves Jiri's immediate problem.
It is quite likely that there is a better way to solve the problem of:
1) softirq handling starving out userspace processing,
2) which could be solved by moving the userspace process elsewhere, and
3) shifting softirq processing to ksoftirqd
A working patch seems to be one of the better ways to start a
discussion, though.
If anybody has a nicer idea on how to solve the problem, I'd even be
willing to implement your idea, and give Jiri another patch to test :)
--
All rights reversed
--
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