Re: RCU question

[George Anzinger]

Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, George Anzinger wrote:
>
>
> > > Well, softirqs should really be preemptible if you care about RT task
> > > latency.  Ingo's patches have had this for months.  Works great.  Maybe
> > > it's time to push it upstream.
> >
> > Yes, I understand, and soft_irq() does turn on interrupts...
> > I was thinking of something like:
> >
> > 	while(softirq_pending()) {
> > 		local_irq_enable();
> > 		do_softirq();
> > 		local_irq_disable();
> > 	}
> > 		<proceed to idle hlt...>
>
>
> But that's a deadlock and if you enable interrupts you race.

Again, I remind you we are in the idle task.  Nothing more important to do.  Or 
do you mean that softirq_pending() will NEVER return false?

The other question is: "Is useful work being done?"

--
George Anzinger   george@xxxxxxxxxx
High-res-timers:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/

-
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/