[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] severe softirq handling performance bug, fix, 2.4.5

    On Sun, 27 May 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

    > I mean everything is fine until the same softirq is marked active
    > again under do_softirq, in such case neither the do_softirq in do_IRQ
    > will run it (because we are in the critical section and we hold the
    > per-cpu locks), nor we will run it again ourself from the underlying
    > do_softirq to avoid live locking into do_softirq.

    if you mean the stock kernel, this scenario you describe is not how it
    behaves, because only IRQ contexts can mark a softirq active again. And
    those IRQ contexts will run do_IRQ() naturally, so while *this*
    do_softirq() invocation wont run those reactivated softirqs, the IRQ
    context that just triggered the softirq will do so.

    the real source of softirq latencies is the local_bh_disable()/enable()
    behavior, see my previous patch.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:54    [W:0.021 / U:0.940 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site