linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH,RESEND] softirq: Introduce SOFTIRQ_FORCED

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

Message-ID: <b9b55cad5b7ca120ebec2acbbbd0a7fc1a986ec7.camel@gmx.de>
Date:   Mon, 23 Aug 2021 06:22:01 +0200
From:   Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To:     Wang Qing <wangqing@...o.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH,RESEND] softirq: Introduce SOFTIRQ_FORCED_THREADING

On Mon, 2021-08-23 at 11:33 +0800, Wang Qing wrote:
> At present, whether the softirq is executed when the interrupt exits
> is controlled by IRQ_FORCED_THREADING. This is unreasonable. It should
> be split and allowed to take effect separately.

Decades long practice suddenly became "unreasonable"?  I think not.  

Trying to carve out bits and pieces of RT to merge immediately isn't
likely to make the ongoing merge effort go anyfaster or smoother.

	Just my $.02,

	-Mike