From: Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
hidave.darkstar@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
paulus@samba.org, Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>,
Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@hartkopp.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Adjust softirq raising in __napi_schedule
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 08:47:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AE56217.3040708@imap.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1256543932.28230.9.camel@johannes.local>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am 26.10.2009 09:58 schrieb Johannes Berg:
> On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 07:54 +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>
>>> No, I wrote that I didn't know. I suppose now that I looked at it I do
>>> know, and only disabling preemption is required.
>> But netif_rx has preemption disabled most of the time (by hardirqs
>> disabling). So maybe disabling preemption isn't the main reason here
>> either?
>
> Not for netpoll though, which may or may not be relevant (if I were to
> venture a guess I'd say it isn't and it disables preemption to be able
> to do the softirq thing)
>
> However, I lost track now of why we're discussing this.
The starting point were several reports of the kernel message:
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08
Originally most if not all of them came from wireless networking,
but I muddied the waters by adding to the mix a case involving ISDN.
You stated that all the solutions proposed so far were wrong, so
we're naturally turning to you for guidance on what the right
solution might be.
> Basically it boils down to using netif_rx() when in (soft)irq, and
> netif_rx_ni() when in process context. That could just be an
> optimisation, but it's a very valid one.
Hmmm. That seems to contradict your earlier statement to me that
simply replacing a call to netif_rx() by one to netif_rx_ni()
when not in interrupt context isn't a valid solution either.
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Tilman
- --
Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc
Bonn, Germany
Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFK5WIXQ3+did9BuFsRAsj1AJ0e4VJ7Nsp69ROXCiT4oM/Q6lIpSwCfZvXS
4nV4tWTIzgk4IRlCt0CCF3Y=r15I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
hidave.darkstar@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
paulus@samba.org, Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>,
Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@hartkopp.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Adjust softirq raising in __napi_schedule
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:47:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AE56217.3040708@imap.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1256543932.28230.9.camel@johannes.local>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am 26.10.2009 09:58 schrieb Johannes Berg:
> On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 07:54 +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>
>>> No, I wrote that I didn't know. I suppose now that I looked at it I do
>>> know, and only disabling preemption is required.
>> But netif_rx has preemption disabled most of the time (by hardirqs
>> disabling). So maybe disabling preemption isn't the main reason here
>> either?
>
> Not for netpoll though, which may or may not be relevant (if I were to
> venture a guess I'd say it isn't and it disables preemption to be able
> to do the softirq thing)
>
> However, I lost track now of why we're discussing this.
The starting point were several reports of the kernel message:
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08
Originally most if not all of them came from wireless networking,
but I muddied the waters by adding to the mix a case involving ISDN.
You stated that all the solutions proposed so far were wrong, so
we're naturally turning to you for guidance on what the right
solution might be.
> Basically it boils down to using netif_rx() when in (soft)irq, and
> netif_rx_ni() when in process context. That could just be an
> optimisation, but it's a very valid one.
Hmmm. That seems to contradict your earlier statement to me that
simply replacing a call to netif_rx() by one to netif_rx_ni()
when not in interrupt context isn't a valid solution either.
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Tilman
- --
Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc
Bonn, Germany
Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFK5WIXQ3+did9BuFsRAsj1AJ0e4VJ7Nsp69ROXCiT4oM/Q6lIpSwCfZvXS
4nV4tWTIzgk4IRlCt0CCF3Y=
=r15I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-26 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-11 9:52 NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08 Dave Young
2009-10-11 10:08 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-11 10:17 ` Michael Buesch
2009-10-11 10:37 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-11 10:38 ` David Miller
2009-10-11 10:55 ` Dave Young
2009-10-11 11:18 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-11 11:40 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-12 8:28 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-12 8:28 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-12 10:32 ` David Miller
2009-10-12 10:32 ` David Miller
2009-10-12 11:25 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-12 11:25 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-15 11:40 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-15 11:40 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-15 17:53 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-15 17:53 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-21 18:46 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-21 18:46 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-21 21:19 ` [PATCH] net: Adjust softirq raising in __napi_schedule Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-21 21:19 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-21 21:25 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-21 21:25 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-21 21:37 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-21 21:37 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-21 21:39 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-21 21:39 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-22 8:27 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-22 8:27 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-23 14:39 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-23 14:39 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-23 14:46 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-23 14:46 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-26 7:41 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-26 7:44 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-26 7:44 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-26 7:54 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-26 7:58 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-26 7:58 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-26 8:47 ` Tilman Schmidt [this message]
2009-10-26 8:47 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-26 8:56 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-26 8:56 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-27 0:52 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-27 0:52 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-27 7:01 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-27 7:01 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-22 11:29 ` David Miller
2009-10-22 11:29 ` David Miller
2009-10-22 12:54 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-10-22 23:37 ` NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08 Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-22 23:37 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-23 13:34 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-23 13:34 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-23 14:27 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-23 14:27 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-23 14:31 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-23 14:31 ` Johannes Berg
2009-10-23 16:33 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-23 16:33 ` Tilman Schmidt
2009-10-11 16:39 ` Joe Korty
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4AE56217.3040708@imap.cc \
--to=tilman@imap.cc \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hidave.darkstar@gmail.com \
--cc=jarkao2@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver@hartkopp.net \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.