Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:19:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:19:22 -0400 Received: from penguin.e-mind.com ([195.223.140.120]:32570 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:19:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:18:04 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Kai Germaschewski Cc: Rusty Russell , torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.7 softirq incorrectness. Message-ID: <20010723161804.C822@athlon.random> In-Reply-To: <20010723013416.B23517@athlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from kai@tp1.ruhr-uni-bochum.de on Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 11:25:23AM +0200 X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 11:25:23AM +0200, Kai Germaschewski wrote: > Hmmh, wait a second. I take it that means calling netif_rx not from > hard-irq context, but e.g. from bh is a bug? (Even if the only consequence No it isn't a bug either, calling it from irq or bh is perfectly fine w.r.t. softirq latency. If you post it from softirq ksoftirqd will handle the overflow event exactly like in net_rx_action. Andrea - 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/