[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240412075220.17943537@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 07:52:20 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Uwe
Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Dmitry
Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Ratheesh
Kannoth <rkannoth@...vell.com>, Ronald Wahl <ronald.wahl@...itan.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] net: ks8851: Handle softirqs at the end of
IRQ thread to fix hang
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:29:04 +0200 Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> irq_thread_fn from irq_thread
> >> irq_thread from kthread
> >> kthread from ret_from_fork
> >
> > These lines are unneeded (in case you need a new version, you can drop them).
>
> I just got back and going through a mountain of email, I see Jakub
> already picked the V2, so, noted for next time. Thank you !
Whether the stack trace is for a hard IRQ or threaded IRQ is the first
thing I looked for when reviewing. Change is about the calling context.
So I figured while not strictly necessary, in this particular case,
these lines may be helpful for people eyeballing the change...
In general, yes, trimming the bottom of the stack is good hygiene.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists