From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: Why do we need tasklet in IFB? Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:38:08 -0700 Message-ID: <20161028143808.3134f296@xeon-e3> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers To: Michael Ma Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f180.google.com ([209.85.192.180]:35330 "EHLO mail-pf0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753749AbcJ1Vh4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:37:56 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f180.google.com with SMTP id s8so43269233pfj.2 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:37:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:36:27 -0700 Michael Ma wrote: > Hi - > > Currently IFB uses tasklet to process tx/rx on the interface that > forwarded the packet to IFB. My understanding on why we're doing this > is that since dev_queue_xmit() can be invoked in interrupt, we want to > defer the processing of original tx/rx in case ifb_xmit() is called > from interrupt. dev_queue_xmit is only called from interrupt if doing netconsole.