Messages in this thread |  | | From | kuznet@ms2 ... | Subject | Re: [patch] softirq performance fixes, cleanups, 2.4.10. | Date | Fri, 28 Sep 2001 23:39:08 +0400 (MSK DST) |
| |
Hello!
> unless you have strong arguments against this approach, i will start > coding this. It's a pretty intrusive change, because all current softirq > users will have to agree on a generic event format + callback that can be > queued. This has to be embedded into skbs and bh-handling structs. What do > you think?
Why skbs?
Anyway, scheme sort of:
do_softirq() { start = jiffies;
while (dequeue()) { if (jiffies - start > 1) goto wakeup_ksoftirq process(); } }
and raise_softirq() enqueuing event to tail, if it is still not queued is nice, not intrusive and very easy.
Only "skbs" scares me. :-)
Alexey - 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/
|  |