Groups > comp.os.linux.development.system > #252

Re: Significance of SoftIRQs and Tasklets

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject	Re: Significance of SoftIRQs and Tasklets
Date	21 Aug 2011 19:50:39 +0300
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	29
Sender	phil@bazspaz.fatphil.org
Message-ID	<87hb5aemjk.fsf@bazspaz.fatphil.org> (permalink)
References	<f6078c68-d8d1-4ee8-a4e6-a3a092780e30@b34g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info	mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="A8KpN8k3FkxHwF32eOLgMA"; logging-data="8070"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+S8q5rC7FR5GtkfM6e4gAQ"
User-Agent	Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4
Cancel-Lock	sha1:3efYsWQ81qVNwmObxRCOefYeWpE=
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.os.linux.development.system:252

Show key headers only | View raw

Ripunjay Tripathi <ripunjay.tripathi@gmail.com> writes:

> While studying Linux interrupt handling I found that Tasklets and
> SoftIRQs are two different methods of performing "bottom half" (lesser
> priority work). I understand this (quite genuine need).
> 
> Difference being, SoftIRQs are re-entarant while a Tasklet is NOT.
> That same SoftIRQ can run on different CPUs while this is NOT the case
> with Tasklets.
> 
> Though I understand this from surface but I fail in understanding the
> requirements of the two features. In what case(s) we may use these
> facilities ?
> 
> Also what do we mean by Tasklets are made upon SoftIRQs ? In one of
> the books I read, in LKML there were debates upon removing Tasklets. I
> got completely confused why one would bring in such a feature ? Some
> shortsightedness (No offense meant) ?
> 
> Any pointers on this will help a lot.

http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/
Chapter 10: Interrupt Handling

Phil
-- 
Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious
belief has a cozy little classification in the DSM.
-- David Melville (on r.a.s.f1)

Back to comp.os.linux.development.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Significance of SoftIRQs and Tasklets Ripunjay Tripathi <ripunjay.tripathi@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 08:55 -0700
  Re: Significance of SoftIRQs and Tasklets Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-21 19:50 +0300
  Re: Significance of SoftIRQs and Tasklets "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2011-08-22 20:24 +0200

csiph-web