Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 11 Feb 2022 16:09:26 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH REPOST] irq_poll: Add local_bh_disable() in cpu_dead
 notifier
Message-ID: <YgZ8Jqu95drJFuBK@linutronix.de>
References: <YgJ/XWVxxWDVBBVA@linutronix.de>
 <YgNzsnIE9bwQZ1Zg@infradead.org>
 <YgUGI9qAKUh4AOUY@linutronix.de>
 <YgYDePJLsVLXKqEP@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YgYDePJLsVLXKqEP@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

On 2022-02-10 22:34:32 [-0800], Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 01:33:39PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > You need to handle the pending softirqs. If you don't handle them
> > immediately or in a deterministic say (like on IRQ exit) then they will
> > be handled at a random point.
> 
> Yes.  Just like regular interrupts.

With the exception that this one was already handled and should be
handled and not delayed until the next interrupt.
And as I said, on NO_HZ you get a warning about unhandled soft-irqs if
the CPU goes idle.

Sebastian