Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752141AbZJWOjJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:39:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751933AbZJWOjJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:39:09 -0400 Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:35227 "EHLO out2.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751604AbZJWOjG (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:39:06 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: OSqw5Jypyz2G71d6ko+5srQ8Yf2BBQHGCbN84InZimM5 1256308750 Message-ID: <4AE1C00B.5010008@imap.cc> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:39:07 +0200 From: Tilman Schmidt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-AT; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090825 SeaMonkey/1.1.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: Jarek Poplawski , David Miller , hidave.darkstar@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org, Michael Buesch , Oliver Hartkopp Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Adjust softirq raising in __napi_schedule References: <4AD31213.6020006@imap.cc> <20091015114052.GA9870@ff.dom.local> <4AD76184.6030900@gmail.com> <4ADF5710.4030505@imap.cc> <20091021211906.GA11401@ami.dom.local> <1256160330.12174.2.camel@johannes.local> <20091021213947.GA12202@ami.dom.local> <1256200021.12174.11.camel@johannes.local> In-Reply-To: <1256200021.12174.11.camel@johannes.local> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1540 Lines: 44 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Johannes Berg schrieb: > On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 23:39 +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > >> I'm not sure I can understand your question. This patch is mainly to >> avoid using netif_rx()/netif_rx_ni() pair as a test of proper process >> context handling; IMHO there're better tools for this (lockdep, >> WARN_ON's). > > I'm saying that it seems to me, as indicated by the API (and without > proof otherwise that's how it is) the networking layer needs to have > packets handed to it with softirqs disabled. Strange. Then what are the two separate functions netif_rx() and netif_rx_ni() for? > This really should be obvious. You're fixing the warning at the source > of the warning, rather than the source of the problem. Good idea. So please do tell us where the source of the problem is. Thanks, Tilman - -- Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc Bonn, Germany Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits. Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFK4cALQ3+did9BuFsRAnW8AKCP4ey+gT2RZBYpzx91PaXd11A/PwCgh35g fhEbJs++1BRIQ3encV8fIm4= =SSaA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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/