Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:11:43 -0800
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: mgross@linux.intel.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com
Subject: Re: queue_work from interrupt Real time
 preemption2.6.11-rc2-RT-V0.7.37-03
Message-Id: <20050216081143.50d0a9d6.davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20050216051645.GB15197@elte.hu>
References: <200502141240.14355.mgross@linux.intel.com>
	<200502141429.11587.mgross@linux.intel.com>
	<20050215104153.GB19866@elte.hu>
	<200502151006.44809.mgross@linux.intel.com>
	<20050216051645.GB15197@elte.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 630
Lines: 18

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 06:16:45 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:


> Maybe the networking
> stack would break if we allowed the TIMER softirq (thread) to preempt
> the NET softirq (threads) (and vice versa)?

The major assumption is that softirq's run indivisibly per-cpu.
Otherwise the per-cpu queues of RX and TX packet work would
get corrupted.

See net/core/dev.c:softnet_data
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/