[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+Op8UsvrsZKKzHfC5j6gLMmY1ZbCg=OY8o4oW8RT5sxg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 07:40:13 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Alexander Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com>,
Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] net: threadable napi poll loop
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa
<hannes@...essinduktion.org> wrote:
> This looks racy to me as the ksoftirqd could be in the progress to stop
> and we would miss another softirq invocation.
Looking at smpboot_thread_fn(), it looks fine :
if (!ht->thread_should_run(td->cpu)) {
preempt_enable_no_resched();
schedule();
} else {
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
preempt_enable();
ht->thread_fn(td->cpu);
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists