Re: e1000_netpoll(): disable_irq() triggers might_sleep() on linux-next
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Wed Oct 29 2014 - 16:51:39 EST
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 09:23:42PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> But at least it allows to mitigate the impact by making it conditional
> at a central point.
>
> static inline void netpoll_lock(struct net_device *nd)
> {
> if (netpoll_active(nd))
> spin_lock(&nd->netpoll_lock);
> }
branch fail vs lock might be a toss on most machines, but if we're
hitting cold cachelines we loose big.
> and let the core code make sure that activation/deactivation of
> netpoll on a particular interface is serialized against the interrupt
> and netpoll calls.
>
> Not sure if it's worth the trouble, but at least it allows to deal
> with it in the core instead of dealing with it on a per driver base.
Does multi-queue have one netdev per queue or does that need moar
logicz?
--
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/