netdev - Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies"

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: <20160229.152427.1590219093309278129.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 29 Feb 2016 15:24:27 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:	peter@...leysoftware.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	umgwanakikbuti@...il.com, romieu@...zoreil.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, john.ogness@...utronix.de,
	bigeasy@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies"

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:14:36 +0100 (CET)

> On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Peter Hurley wrote:
>> Or flipping your argument on its head, why not just _always_ execute
>> softirq in ksoftirqd?
> 
> Which is what that change effectivley does. And that makes a lot of sense,
> because you get the softirq load under scheduler control and do not let the
> softirq run as a context stealing entity which is completely uncontrollable by
> the scheduler.

+1