Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f211.google.com ([209.85.219.211]:58216 "EHLO mail-ew0-f211.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754334AbZI3Ord (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:47:33 -0400 To: Michael Buesch Cc: Oliver Hartkopp , "John W. Linville" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Berg Subject: Re: mac80211: NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08 References: <200909111648.50902.mb@bu3sch.de> <20090929192928.GF2678@tuxdriver.com> <4AC3475C.7000403@hartkopp.net> <200909301633.04376.mb@bu3sch.de> From: Kalle Valo Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:47:32 +0300 In-Reply-To: <200909301633.04376.mb@bu3sch.de> (Michael Buesch's message of "Wed\, 30 Sep 2009 16\:33\:02 +0200") Message-ID: <87ocosqykb.fsf@purkki.valot.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Michael Buesch writes: >> I don't know how expensive in_interrupt() is, but it IMO should be >> avoided when the context for a code section can be determined in >> another way. > > What if we just get the fix merged and discuss later whether it's > worth to optimize a picosecond or not?? My patch fixes the _bug_. > You can merge a more "efficient" fix later that saves one or two CPU > cycles. I agree with Michael. The bug is real and I have verified that Michael's patch fixes the issue. Better to apply the patch now, it's trivial to change the implementation if/when the network stack has support for this. -- Kalle Valo