![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 09:55:06PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 18:49 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > - * softirq handlers will have completed, since in some kernels > > + * softirq handlers will have completed, since in some kernels, these > > + * handlers can run in process context, and can block. > > * > > I was under the impression that softirq handlers can run in process > context in all kernels. Specifically, in realtime variants softirqs > always run in process context, and in mainline this only happens under > high load. We might be talking past each other on this one. If I am not getting too confused, it is possible to configure a mainline kernel so that the load cannot rise high enough to force softirqs into process context. Although looking at 2.6.15, it appears that this would require rebuilding after hand-editing the value of MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART, which some might feel too-brutal of tweaking to be considered mere "configuration". In any case, the key point of the comment is that synchronize_sched() is not guaranteed to wait for all pending softirq handlers to complete. Does the comment make that sufficiently clear? Thanx, Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-01-18 06:32 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||