From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B67278F34 for ; Fri, 9 May 2025 11:58:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746791911; cv=none; b=RMVYdWl5sR2R7BBIFLDd7OEaroI/kevuFshPKgKwSgj+Q093dKrPfYvNI/gqvLLMFBBejk/g1kM3FJ5DQaPNMiO9dTTtoRh/LLHxW+EpUEfeaR1YqpPQ4nXFTYen8ckpkC6fPjHbNpwQ1jQ7RhHDSfCeoWQZhQ6K5DHx1I+FbGY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746791911; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dsSvYZvde6/5EkYxQikz4oG6dsceowppGFdoHhRq+tc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Ow3RsD8gnhhLAjx6SVbUDL/KQzCOiYL/CKyevwAqjIqdYwos/XzcSTLGMDVR2re0DBe8Yr7QnW3/cryODkV2IhC6PRx3KHIrmiay4jfC1111ftlkuprk4n1vyAXIByfPEbZdFszkpONwV7XrygHkW2Cey3kkTrrNeem9MVDPCVo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=dps4ANgQ; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=bVQgTY4O; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="dps4ANgQ"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="bVQgTY4O" Date: Fri, 9 May 2025 13:58:23 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1746791908; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=re3w9skpKOlyeZkqJb5/x4eZJzz+iBjimR0Qdp7eQDg=; b=dps4ANgQsKAY23evt/ksJnxsSYBpxTmvnrpb86jPq5VhPbuncazyG9hlFYK/1CA7MgIVqs FPAlRmWr3B0BBAEKvDPdmrPhLD1lObxgCbOVNGPtDyrd2BPdvbEqygCHcyLQ6iAu1JcBNC T4iEXZdpLgeqVXyKVfiSRmWR9oUM6YO7QqXU6YMwyMxQR4mMPpzj9VCIxaY9oyOQ9CZQcH dHJBiZIso5BPqjB8Jn3I/dVGN86AK3gRsSQVzW8roh2lTGfBV5ihG5sSNN1mnjHPNoQYUT XRkqvK8rAB+igjXhgL4dPBKtB2cZKF7dzmSntd8nuFhejwAk6iKOtElh6isW4Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1746791908; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=re3w9skpKOlyeZkqJb5/x4eZJzz+iBjimR0Qdp7eQDg=; b=bVQgTY4O2GeXFCfSyIG1jVXxzDinK8atXj5L7Zzt0l1/J/oQfsGnu6dJvpiNhzYy2Lkuyv wKvBkVSyUaQYEdDw== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 00/18] net: Cover more per-CPU storage with local nested BH locking. Message-ID: <20250509115823.DriYhjUm@linutronix.de> References: <20250430124758.1159480-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20250505160253.3d50ebab@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250505160253.3d50ebab@kernel.org> On 2025-05-05 16:02:53 [-0700], Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:47:40 +0200 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > I was looking at the build-time defined per-CPU variables in net/ and > > added the needed local-BH-locks in order to be able to remove the > > current per-CPU lock in local_bh_disable() on PREMPT_RT. > > > > The work is not yet complete, I just wanted to post what I have so far > > instead of sitting on it. > > Looks fine overall but we're anticipating a respin for patch 5? > When you repost could you split out the netfilter patches so they > can be applied by Pablo to the netfilter tree? Yes, will do. I was mostly off the last week. > And there really doesn't seem to be a strong reason to make this > series longer than 15 patches, so please don't add more: > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html Okay. Sebastian