Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies"

From	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies"
Date	2016-03-07 18:10 +0100
Message-ID	<ra6Po-5Ig-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<r6RDc-70n-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <r72yB-6lb-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <r7d0Z-5MI-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <r7o66-5A0-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <ra5qi-4EI-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 16:31 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 02/29/2016 05:58 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > WRT -rt: if dma tasklets really do have hard (ish) constraints, -rt
> > recently "broke" in the same way.. of all softirqs which are deferred
> > to kthread context, due to a recent change, only timer/hrtimer are
> > executed at realtime priority by default.
> 
> no. All softirqs are invoked in the context of the current process that
> triggerd the softirq invocation. If NAPI goes on for too long (or other
> softirq can't be executed in this context) it will continue in the
> ksoftirqd. And this threads runs at a normal priority like it does in
> mainline.
> I adjusted it with mainline.

Yeah, that's what I said, the ksoftirqd case became the same in -rt.

	-Mike

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies" Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> - 2016-03-07 16:40 +0100
  Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies" Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 18:10 +0100

csiph-web