From: Mark Gross <mgross@linux.intel.com>
To: george@mvista.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com
Subject: Re: queue_work from interrupt Real time preemption2.6.11-rc2-RT-V0.7.37-03
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:55:06 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200502161455.07039.mgross@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <421389F5.3060007@mvista.com>
On Wednesday 16 February 2005 09:59, George Anzinger wrote:
> David S. Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 06:16:45 +0100
> >
> > Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >>Maybe the networking
> >>stack would break if we allowed the TIMER softirq (thread) to preempt
> >>the NET softirq (threads) (and vice versa)?
> >
> > The major assumption is that softirq's run indivisibly per-cpu.
> > Otherwise the per-cpu queues of RX and TX packet work would
> > get corrupted.
That's a problem (for my idea).
>
> For what its worth, I, a short while ago, put together a workqueue package
> to a) allow easy priority setting for work queues and b) change either
> softirq, tasklet or bh code to use workqueues. This was done mostly with
> CPP macros and a few conversion routines. I then converted the network
> code to use this package simply by adding a key include to a couple of
> files. The result worked on UP but ended up hanging the network code on
> SMP. Everything else still worked, but not the net stuff. I never ran
> down the problem as the "boss" was not interested in SMP...
>
Thanks, my implementation doesn't lock up with my unit testing (scp kernel
tarballs). However; I did have my scheduling pollocy for the net_tx net_rx
and timer set to SCHED_RR using the same priority for each. I'll fiddle with
t relative prioites across the different soft IRQ's an see how much smoke I
can cause.
--mgross
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-16 23:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-14 20:40 queue_work from interrupt Real time preemption2.6.11-rc2-RT-V0.7.37-03 Mark Gross
2005-02-14 21:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-02-14 22:29 ` Mark Gross
2005-02-15 10:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-02-15 18:06 ` Mark Gross
2005-02-16 5:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-02-16 16:11 ` David S. Miller
2005-02-16 17:59 ` George Anzinger
2005-02-16 22:55 ` Mark Gross [this message]
2005-02-16 18:02 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-02-17 7:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-02-17 15:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-02-17 7:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-02-17 14:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-02-17 16:14 ` Mark Gross
2005-03-29 8:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-03-31 18:41 ` Mark Gross
2005-04-01 5:55 ` Ingo Molnar
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=200502161455.07039.mgross@linux.intel.com \
--to=mgross@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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