From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D6C0C433E0 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BF5C2070B for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="Utl4iStv"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="RHYIU2tM" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726728AbgGXXbl (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:31:41 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:41168 "EHLO galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726503AbgGXXbk (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:31:40 -0400 From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1595633499; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=s86KpX4gEQp9O8JUTp5Kv2QZ3KmBoiheWWny0AIVQrw=; b=Utl4iStvmks4F/x7c50zDmwxsxqWfC484X/c1aGEriQJUQXjdCrez7GOHMCyOooB4JdNQw Q8CsNfQVInlbev77cIGJj1lbIXC7PNymbSD0G8pvUhlCr8uZw3Zyd71GIQLo0ID6waEJ7O 7CLBPgcOrpsUhUXJ4EzP6pvBDUFhUij++AxDYqCcRkz/qtt9MLPWos6+8m6wuxvIxV5gFU +Gp+8mJspSLC/uLFw+3J5YGd14jgjMa1v7BObs+OzA404xzYcCFZxp7uHimoXpeFKUVBIh UgADjIeLRF1EwUx7Uxg87uewNLCuZumecSXZ5IhX2P6PhRjCh4RIGKwCZoNdsQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1595633499; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=s86KpX4gEQp9O8JUTp5Kv2QZ3KmBoiheWWny0AIVQrw=; b=RHYIU2tMmbWTK4xQgazmPFYe+Wy35hX0U5R04s9JQHcDADlWTPeZwld4q7THZGfX8ZZjnT Gp/SOjSSCx+k0oBQ== To: jun qian Cc: kernel test robot , peterz@infradead.org, will@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Uladzislau Rezki , Yafang Shao , lkp@lists.01.org Subject: Re: [Softirq] a76eadba0d: WARNING:at_net/mac80211/rx.c:#ieee80211_rx_napi[mac80211] In-Reply-To: References: <20200723091715.GL19262@shao2-debian> <87v9iexztl.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <874kpyxpro.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 01:31:37 +0200 Message-ID: <87y2n8sd5y.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org jun qian 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=EF=BC=8C > 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 :)