From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Alain Schroeder <alain@parkautomat.net>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de>
Subject: Re: tun.c patch to fix "smp_processor_id() in preemptible code"
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 18:35:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1097879702.6737.7.camel@krustophenia.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1097876587.4170.16.camel@marvin.home.parkautomat.net>
On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 17:43, Alain Schroeder wrote:
> I was getting these traces on a SMP host:
Your patch:
+ preempt_disable();
netif_rx_ni(skb);
+ preempt_enable();
just wraps this code in preempt_disable/enable:
static inline int netif_rx_ni(struct sk_buff *skb)
{
int err = netif_rx(skb);
if (softirq_pending(smp_processor_id()))
do_softirq();
return err;
}
Isn't this considered an incorrect use of preempt_disable/enable? My
reasoning is that if this was correct we would see preempt_dis/enable
sprinkled all over the code which it isn't.
Why do you have to call do_softirq like that? I was under the
impression that you raise a softirq and it gets run later.
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-15 23:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-15 21:43 tun.c patch to fix "smp_processor_id() in preemptible code" Alain Schroeder
2004-10-15 22:22 ` Herbert Xu
2004-10-15 22:35 ` Lee Revell [this message]
[not found] ` <200410172314.38597.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua>
2004-10-19 18:31 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-19 21:35 ` Herbert Xu
2004-10-19 21:51 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-19 21:54 ` Herbert Xu
2004-10-19 22:10 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-19 22:33 ` David S. Miller
2004-10-19 22:42 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-19 22:42 ` David S. Miller
2004-10-19 22:51 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-20 0:44 ` David S. Miller
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=1097879702.6737.7.camel@krustophenia.net \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=alain@parkautomat.net \
--cc=jbglaw@lug-owl.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox