linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.6 3/3] net: Allow to use SMP threads for backlog NAPI.

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: <2026020449-deplete-swoosh-2387@gregkh>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 14:54:59 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, wen.yang@...ux.dev,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 3/3] net: Allow to use SMP threads for backlog NAPI.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 11:38:33AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2026-01-20 10:21:58 [+0100], Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > Please see patch 0/3 in this series:
> > > > 	https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1768751557.git.wen.yang@linux.dev/
> > > 
> > > The reasoning why this is needed is due to PREEMPT_RT. This targets v6.6
> > > and PREEMPT_RT is officially supported upstream since v6.12. For v6.6
> > > you still need the out-of-tree patch. This means not only select the
> > > Kconfig symbol but also a bit futex, ptrace or printk. This queue does
> > > not include the three patches here but has another workaround having
> > > more or less the same effect.
> > > 
> > > If this is needed only for PREEMPT_RT's sake I would suggest to route it
> > > via the stable-rt instead and replace what is currently there.
> > 
> > It's already merged, should this be reverted?  I forgot RT was only for
> > 6.12 and newer, sorry.
> 
> Jakub doesn't seem to be thrilled about this backport and I don't see a
> requirement for it. Based on this yes, please revert it.
> 
> If Wen wants this still to happen he should either provide better
> reasoning why this is needed based on the latest stable v6.6 as-is or
> ask stable-rt team to take this instead the current workaround.

Ok, both now reverted, thanks for the review!

greg k-h