[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+YKrVOgfFwW-2psfCzq5_YLdmbV06-H-1FCOwXdMBuzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 14:09:42 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Alexander Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com>,
Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] net: threadable napi poll loop
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa
<hannes@...essinduktion.org> wrote:
> I agree here, but I don't think this patch particularly is a lot of
> bloat and something very interesting people can play with and extend upon.
>
Sure, very rarely patch authors think their stuff is bloat.
I prefer to fix kernel softirq.c, or at least show me that you tried
hard enough.
I am pretty sure that the following would work :
When ksoftirqd is scheduled, remember this in a per cpu variable
(ksoftiqd_scheduled)
When enabling BH , do not call do_softirq() if this variable is set.
ksoftirqd would clear the variable at the right place (probably in
run_ksoftirqd())
Sure, this might add a lot of latency regressions, but lets fix them.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists