From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8536] New: Kernel drops UDP packets silently when reading from certain proc file entries Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 09:15:17 +0200 Message-ID: <46568D05.9080309@cosmosbay.com> References: <4656872C.9000701@cosmosbay.com> <20070525065712.GA26619@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Andrew Morton , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, andsve@gmail.com To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from gw1.cosmosbay.com ([86.65.150.130]:41671 "EHLO gw1.cosmosbay.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750854AbXEYHPg (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 May 2007 03:15:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070525065712.GA26619@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Herbert Xu a =E9crit : > On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 08:50:20AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> If this patch really helps, this means cond_resched_softirq() >> doesnt work at all and should be fixed, or just zapped as it >> is seldom used. >=20 > cond_resched_softirq lets other threads run if they want to. > It doesn't run pending softirq's at all. In fact, it doesn't > even wake up ksoftirqd. I am very glad you fixed /proc/net/tcp, but I would like to understand why this cond_resched_softirq() even exist. Its name and behavior dont match at all. The only remaining use is in __release_sock(). Should we schedule threads, or ksoftirqd as well in this function ?