From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753514AbcB2SZr (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:25:47 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f181.google.com ([209.85.192.181]:34902 "EHLO mail-pf0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752149AbcB2SZm (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:25:42 -0500 Message-ID: <1456770279.648.85.camel@edumazet-ThinkPad-T530> Subject: Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies" From: Eric Dumazet To: Peter Hurley Cc: Mike Galbraith , Francois Romieu , Eric Dumazet , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, John Ogness , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:24:39 -0800 In-Reply-To: <56D48869.1000106@hurleysoftware.com> References: <56D1E8B6.6090003@hurleysoftware.com> <1456638957.3676.12.camel@gmail.com> <20160228170109.GA16322@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <1456721889.3488.67.camel@gmail.com> <56D45DAF.5070709@hurleysoftware.com> <1456759153.648.61.camel@edumazet-ThinkPad-T530> <56D469B2.2070707@hurleysoftware.com> <1456762914.648.76.camel@edumazet-ThinkPad-T530> <56D48869.1000106@hurleysoftware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On lun., 2016-02-29 at 10:05 -0800, Peter Hurley wrote: > While I appreciate the attempt, that's not the problem. > > Just to be clear > > if (time_before(jiffies, end) && !need_resched() && > --max_restart) > goto restart; > > aborts softirq *even if 0ns have elapsed*, if NET_RX has woken a process. Sure, now remove the 1st and 2nd condition. You would still 'abort' (ie wakeup ksoftirqd really) when --max_restart becomes 0 So, instead of some subtle load dependent bug, you know have a reliable trigger. The fact it took 3 years for someone to complain about this change should tell us something really. The only way for your bug to hide would be to remove all the 'break infinite loop' logic. And this is not going to happen.