Re: [RFC GIT PULL] softirq: Consolidation and stack overrun fix

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 02:42:57PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 04:44 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > So the safest way to fix this is to unconditionally call do_softirq()
> > from irq_exit().
> > A performance penalty may come along but safety primes.
> > 
> > We should probably do that and work on longer term solutions (Kconfig
> > based arch switch, etc...)
> > for the next merge window?
> 
> As you prefer, though I'm keen on getting the "fast" version in RHEL7 if
> RH will take it :-)

So what is the fast version? Converting __do_softirq() to do_softirq()
unconditionally.

RH will accept any fix that goes upstream.

> 
> From the generic code POV, it's a one-liner #ifdef to select between
> do_softirq and __do_softirq() right ? Then it's up to the arch to
> #define I_CAN_DO_FAST !

I'd rather say #define I_CAN_DO_SAFE :)

But I guess the kind of symbol we want is some ARCH_HAS_IRQ_STACK_LOW_HANDLER

> 
> > I'll respin the series plus the regression fix, unless somebody has a
> > better solution.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ben.
> 
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/