linux-kernel - Re: [Softirq] a76eadba0d: WARNING:at_net/mac80211/rx.c:#ieee80211_rx

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87y2n8sd5y.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sat, 25 Jul 2020 01:31:37 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     jun qian <qianjun.kernel@...il.com>
Cc:     kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
        will@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
        Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>, lkp@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [Softirq] a76eadba0d: WARNING:at_net/mac80211/rx.c:#ieee80211_rx_napi[mac80211]

jun qian <qianjun.kernel@...il.com> writes:
> I have two questions that need to be discussed.
>
> 1. If the __do_sofrirq() is executed in the ksoftirqd, we may not need
> to check the timeout in the loop.
> 2. Both the invoke_softirq() and run_ksoftirqd()  will execute
> __do_sofirq, they all execute the same code，
>     when it is in the ksoftirqd, Do we need to wake up ksoftirqd in
> the process context according to
>     max_restart and MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME. In my opinion, If we  use a flag
> to distinguish where
>     __do_softirq() is called from,  we can do what is most suitable
> for __do_softirq based on this flag.

You answered your questions yourself :)