[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1802131735460.1130@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:36:34 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, edumazet@...gle.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, efault@....de, peterz@...radead.org,
dima@...sta.com, frederic@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
0x7f454c46@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
fweisbec@...il.com, hannes@...essinduktion.org, mingo@...nel.org,
alexander.levin@...izon.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, rrendec@...sta.com, riel@...hat.com,
sgruszka@...hat.com, wanpeng.li@...mail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] softirq: Defer net rx/tx processing to ksoftirqd
context
On Tue, 6 Feb 2018, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2018-01-17 17:24:47 [-0500], David Miller wrote:
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 14:02:43 -0800
> > > There is also the netif_rx_ni() stuff.
> > >
> > > Can't remember right now why it is not using
> > > local_bh_{diable,enable}() pair instead
> > > of preempt_disable() ... if (local_softirq_pending()) do_softirq();
> >
> > Hmmm, that code predates the initial GIT repository build.
> >
> > I do remember we had some back and forth with that stuff.
>
> So I did a little research and tried to replace preempt_disable() with
> local_bh_disable() [0] a while ago.
>
> [0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170616172400.10809-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de
Maybe you should just try again with a slightly better changelog :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists