From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT] net: move xmit_recursion to per-task variable on -RT
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:34:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5698BD29.8090405@stressinduktion.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1601150916180.3575@nanos>
On 15.01.2016 09:21, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>> On 14.01.2016 23:20, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 23:02 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>>>
>>>> We are just adding a second recursion limit solely to openvswitch which
>>>> has the same problem:
>>>>
>>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/566769/
>>>>
>>>> This time also we depend on rcu_read_lock marking the section being
>>>> nonpreemptible. Nice would be a more generic solution here which doesn't
>>>> need to always add something to *current.
>>>
>>>
>>> Note that rcu_read_lock() does not imply that preemption is disabled.
>>
>> Exactly, it is conditional on CONFIG_PREEMPT_CPU/CONFIG_PREMPT_COUNT but
>> haven't thought about exactly that in this moment.
>
> Wrong. CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU makes RCU preemptible.
>
> If that is not set then it fiddles with preempt_count when
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=y. If CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=n then you have a non
> preemptible system anyway.
>
> So you cannot assume that rcu_read_lock() disables preemption.
Sorry for maybe writing it misleading but that is exactly what I wanted
to say here. Yes, I agree, I didn't really check because of _bh and
rcu_read_lock. This was a mistake. ;)
I already send out an updated patch with added preemption guards.
Thanks,
Hannes
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-15 9:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-13 15:23 [PATCH RT] net: move xmit_recursion to per-task variable on -RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-01-13 17:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-14 14:50 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-01-14 22:02 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-01-14 22:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-01-14 23:00 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-01-15 8:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-01-15 9:34 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa [this message]
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=5698BD29.8090405@stressinduktion.org \
--to=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox