From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261773AbTJHT5a (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:57:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261776AbTJHT5a (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:57:30 -0400 Received: from yakov.inr.ac.ru ([193.233.7.111]:18862 "HELO yakov.inr.ac.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261773AbTJHT53 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:57:29 -0400 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200310081957.XAA01425@yakov.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: NAPI Race? To: marko@pacujo.net (Marko Rauhamaa) Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 23:57:14 +0400 (MSD) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hadi@cyberus.ca (Jamal Hadi Salim), Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se (Robert Olsson) In-Reply-To: from "Marko Rauhamaa" at Oct 07, 2003 08:07:31 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! > interrupted for some other reason, the packet will get processed only at > the next jiffie when the soft irq is invoked again. > > Am I mistaken? Yes, you are wrong. It is processed as soon as possible. > As an aside, it looks also as though the design might technically allow > the network driver to starve the CPU (the very situation NAPI was > designed to protect against). Nope. NAPI is not expected to cure starvation caused by softirqs. Alexey