[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200824105956.7urh3wkzd45ror3r@skbuf>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:59:56 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Jiafei.Pan@....com,
kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, claudiu.manoil@....com,
ioana.ciornei@....com, yangbo.lu@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] enetc: use napi_schedule to be compatible
with PREEMPT_RT
Hi Sasha,
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 05:34:30PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 03:51:44PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2020-08-03 18:21:45 [-0700], David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
> > > > The driver calls napi_schedule_irqoff() from a context where, in RT,
> > > > hardirqs are not disabled, since the IRQ handler is force-threaded.
> > …
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jiafei Pan <Jiafei.Pan@....com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
> > >
> > > Applied.
> >
> > Could these two patches be forwarded -stable, please? The changelog
> > describes this as a problem on PREEMPT_RT but this also happens on !RT
> > with the `threadirqs' commandline switch.
> >
> > Sebastian
>
> I expect the driver maintainers to have something to say about this. I
> didn't test on stable kernels, and at least for dpaa2-eth, the change
> would need to go pretty deep down the stable line.
>
> Also, not really sure who is using the threadirqs option except for
> testing purposes.
>
> Thanks,
> -Vladimir
Do you think that this type of request is something that AUTOSEL can
handle?
Thanks,
-Vladimir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists