netdev - Re: question about softirqs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 13 May 2009 09:55:11 +0400
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	paulus@...ba.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: question about softirqs

Hi.

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:12:58AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra (a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl) wrote:
> Wouldn't the even better solution be to get rid of softirqs
> all-together?

And move tasklets into some thread context?

Only if we are ready to fix 7 times rescheduling regressions compared to
kernel threads (work queue actually). At least that's how tasklet
behaved compared to work queue 1.5 years ago in the simplest
and quite naive test where tasklet/work rescheduled iself number of
times:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-crypto-vger&m=119462472517405&w=2

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html