On Mon, 21 May 2007, Heiko Carstens wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 09:29:49PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 21:18 +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
Hmm, that's a different problem than the 0x22 which shows up on
hyperthreading enabled P4 systems. Are you using plip ?
No, after all it turned out that is caused by an IBM internal module.
Just ignore me, sorry for the noise :)
Just in case you're interested: I just looked into it and it turned
out that this module was calling netif_rx() from process context,
just like plip. Changing it to netif_rx_ni() fixes it.
Thanks, that's a good pointer. You should have cc'ed Dave Miller and the
guy who found this plip thingy. Care to resend ?
No problem. Here we go, even though I doubt that netif_rx_ni() is what
people want for plip. Dunno...
netif_rx_ni calls softirq synchronously, am I right? That would probably
hurt plip. I can try it if someone will be interested in it, but I doubt
it is good solution for any network interfaces except tun.
BTW. does in_interrupt() have high cost on some high-performance
architectures? Would it be possible to just add if (!in_interrupt())
wakeup_softirqd(); to netif_rx()?
Mikulas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
