[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A0B233B.8010105@nortel.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 13:44:59 -0600
From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
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
Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 01:04:09PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
>> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>
>>> network packets are normally processed by the network packet interrupt's
>>> softirq or alternatively in the NAPI poll loop.
>> If we have a high priority task, ksoftirqd may not get a chance to run.
>
> In this case the next interrupt will also process them. It will just
> go more slowly because interrupts limit the work compared to ksoftirqd.
I realize that they will eventually get processed. My point is that the
documentation (in-kernel, online, and in various books) says that
softirqs will be processed _on the return from a syscall_. As we all
agree, this is not necessarily the case.
Chris
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists