mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: jun qian <qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
	peterz@infradead.org, will@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>,
	lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [Softirq] a76eadba0d: WARNING:at_net/mac80211/rx.c:#ieee80211_rx_napi[mac80211]
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 01:31:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y2n8sd5y.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKc596Lp3m3Ny9joOckYPsR5Lmok978bceMYNBrzsk6ozFjqhw@mail.gmail.com>

jun qian <qianjun.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
> I have two questions that need to be discussed.
>
> 1. If the __do_sofrirq() is executed in the ksoftirqd, we may not need
> to check the timeout in the loop.
> 2. Both the invoke_softirq() and run_ksoftirqd()  will execute
> __do_sofirq, they all execute the same code，
>     when it is in the ksoftirqd, Do we need to wake up ksoftirqd in
> the process context according to
>     max_restart and MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME. In my opinion, If we  use a flag
> to distinguish where
>     __do_softirq() is called from,  we can do what is most suitable
> for __do_softirq based on this flag.

You answered your questions yourself :)

      reply	other threads:[~2020-07-24 23:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-20 13:08 [RFC PATCH v2] Softirq:avoid large sched delay from the pending softirqs qianjun.kernel
2020-07-22  4:58 ` jun qian
2020-07-22 18:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-07-23  4:48   ` jun qian
2020-07-23  9:17 ` [Softirq] a76eadba0d: WARNING:at_net/mac80211/rx.c:#ieee80211_rx_napi[mac80211] kernel test robot
2020-07-23 10:58   ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-07-23 13:57     ` jun qian
2020-07-23 14:35       ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-07-24  5:35         ` jun qian
2020-07-24 23:31           ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87y2n8sd5y.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qianjun.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome