[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: ksoftirqd? (Was: Re: [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool)
On Sat, Sep 22, 2001 at 02:56:58PM +0200, Roger Larsson wrote:
> Hi,
> We have a new kid on the block since we started thinking of a preemptive
> kernel.
> ksoftirqd...
> Running with nice 19 (shouldn't it really be -19?)
> Or have a RT setting? (maybe not since one of the reasons for
> softirqd would be lost - would be scheduled in immediately)
> Can't a high prio or RT process be starved due to missing
> service (bh) after an interrupt?

It cannot be starved, if ksoftirqd is never scheduled the do_softirq()
will be run by the next timer irq or apic_timer irq.

> This will not show up in latency profiling patches since
> the kernel does what is requested...
> Previously it was run directly after interrupt,
> before returning to the interrupted process...

It is still the case, that's also the common case actually.

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 13:03    [W:0.280 / U:0.644 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site