From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 12:18:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 12:18:22 -0400 Received: from minus.inr.ac.ru ([193.233.7.97]:4873 "HELO ms2.inr.ac.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 12:18:18 -0400 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200109281618.UAA04122@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: [patch] softirq performance fixes, cleanups, 2.4.10. To: mingo@elte.hu Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 20:18:20 +0400 (MSK DST) Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, bcrl@redhat.com, andrea@suse.de In-Reply-To: from "Ingo Molnar" at Sep 26, 1 06:44:03 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! > - removed 'mask' handling from do_softirq() - it's unnecessery due to the > restarts. this further simplifies the code. Ingo, but this means that only the first softirq is handled. "mask" implements round-robin and this is necessary. > - '[ksoftirqd_CPU0]' is confusing on UP systems, changed it to > '[ksoftirqd]' instead. It is useless to argue about preferences, but universal naming scheme looks as less confusing yet. :-) Generally, I dislike this patch. It is utterly ugly. Also, you did not assure me that you interpret problem correctly. netif_rx() is __insensitive__ to latencies due to blocked softirq restarts. It stops spinning only when it becomes true cpu hog. And scheduling ksoftirqd is the only variant here. Most likely, your problem will disappear when you renice ksoftirqd to higher priority f.e. equal to priority of tux threads. Alexey