|
Hello,
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Wensong Zhang wrote:
> No, it is my mistake. I don't know why I suddenly thought that network
> softirq might be interrupted by a bottom half at a CPU last night. :)
>
> Just had a look at the do_softirq(), it disables bottom half before
> calling softirqs. So, there is no need to disable bh again in mod_sltimer.
> will remove the _bh change soon.
Yes, do_softirq guarantees that before the bhs are disabled
the CPU can't be preempted from IRQ. The softirq runs with irqs enabled
and bhs disabled (softirqs, bhs and tasklets have same interrupt level,
only hardirqs can preempt them on same CPU). May be this is the reason
hardirq to preempt softirq (detected in mod_sltimer) but we can't say the
same for its bh. So, for me, the report for problem in mod_sltimer is
suspicious. But we have to perform some tests.
> Thanks,
>
> Wensong
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
|
