[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250122063625.3ccac084@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 06:36:25 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
andrew+netdev@...n.ch, horms@...nel.org, dan.carpenter@...aro.org,
nbd@....name, lorenzo@...nel.org, ryder.lee@...iatek.com,
shayne.chen@...iatek.com, sean.wang@...iatek.com, kvalo@...nel.org,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com,
quan.zhou@...iatek.com, johannes.berg@...el.com,
emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com, leitao@...ian.org, mingyen.hsieh@...iatek.com,
leon.yen@...iatek.com, deren.wu@...iatek.com, chui-hao.chiu@...iatek.com,
kuniyu@...zon.com, romieu@...zoreil.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 7/7] wifi: mt76: move napi_enable() from under
BH
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:25:46 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> napi_schedule() can run from arbitrary contexts though...
>
> BH protection seems strange to me, but this is orthogonal to your fix.
Right, it doesn't need the BH "protection", it's just what we
do to make sure there is a softirq hook point after we call it.
Since local_irq_restore() does not call softirqs.
I didn't know how to express that in a way that would be understandable
for most :S
Thanks for catching the other bug!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists