From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua,
Linux Network Development <netdev@oss.sgi.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
maxk@qualcomm.com, irda-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: tun.c patch to fix "smp_processor_id() in preemptible code"
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:42:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1098225729.23628.2.camel@krustophenia.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041019153308.488d34c1.davem@davemloft.net>
On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 18:33, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:10:58 -0400
> Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
>
> > /*
> > * Since receiving is always initiated from a tasklet (in iucv.c),
> > * we must use netif_rx_ni() instead of netif_rx()
> > */
> >
> > This implies that the author thought it was a matter of correctness to
> > use netif_rx_ni vs. netif_rx. But it looks like the only difference is
> > that the former sacrifices preempt-safety for performance.
>
> You can't really delete netif_rx_ni(), so if there is a preemptability
> issue, just add the necessary preemption protection around the softirq
> checks.
>
Why not? AIUI the only valid reason to use preempt_disable/enable is in
the case of per-CPU data. This is not "real" per-CPU data, it's a
performance hack. Therefore it would be incorrect to add the preemption
protection, the fix is not to manually call do_softirq but to let the
softirq run by the normal mechanism.
Am I missing something?
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-19 22:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1097876587.4170.16.camel@marvin.home.parkautomat.net>
[not found] ` <1097879702.6737.7.camel@krustophenia.net>
[not found] ` <200410172314.38597.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua>
2004-10-19 18:31 ` tun.c patch to fix "smp_processor_id() in preemptible code" 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 [this message]
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=1098225729.23628.2.camel@krustophenia.net \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=irda-users@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxk@qualcomm.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).