[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+3+y1br8V4BP5Gq58_1Z-guYQotOKAr9N1k519PLE7rA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 14:34:39 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>, Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>,
Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: Handle napi_schedule() calls from non-interrupt
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 2:21 PM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> That looks good and looks like what I did initially:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250212174329.53793-2-frederic@kernel.org/
>
> Do you prefer me doing it over DEBUG_NET_WARN_ON_ONCE() or with lockdep
> like in the link?
To be clear, I have not tried this thing yet.
Perhaps let your patch as is (for stable backports), and put the debug
stuff only after some tests, in net-next.
It is very possible that napi_schedule() in the problematic cases were
not on a fast path anyway.
Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists