Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:36:21 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
To:     Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
cc:     Ignat Korchagin <ignat@cloudflare.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>, agk@redhat.com,
        dm-devel@redhat.com, dm-crypt@saout.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@cloudflare.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] dm-crypt excessive overhead
In-Reply-To: <20200620012332.GA25340@gondor.apana.org.au>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.02.2006201535280.24999@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
References: <20200619164132.1648-1-ignat@cloudflare.com> <20200619165548.GA24779@redhat.com> <alpine.LRH.2.02.2006191429060.23991@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com> <20200620012332.GA25340@gondor.apana.org.au>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, Herbert Xu wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:39:39PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> > I'm looking at this and I'd like to know why does the crypto API fail in 
> > hard-irq context and why does it work in tasklet context. What's the exact 
> > reason behind this?
> 
> You're not supposed to do any real work in IRQ handlers.  All
> the substantial work should be postponed to softirq context.

I see.

BTW - should it also warn if it is running in a process context with 
interrupts disabled?

Mikulas

> Why do you need to do work in hard IRQ context?
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
> PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
>