| To: | rml@xxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled. |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:53:14 -0800 (PST) |
| Cc: | torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dane@xxxxxxxxxx, shmulik.hen@xxxxxxxxx, bonding-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bonding-announce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1048794730.775.14.camel@localhost> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303271120230.31459-100000@home.transmeta.com> <20030327.113933.123322481.davem@redhat.com> <1048794730.775.14.camel@localhost> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Robert Love <rml@xxxxxxxxx> Date: 27 Mar 2003 14:52:11 -0500 On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 14:39, David S. Miller wrote: > I hadn't considered this, good idea. I'm trying this out right now. I hope it works. I have a sinking feeling we call it some places that may have interrupts disabled... Your sinking feeling was warranted. Nearly every hw IRQ implementation invokes irq_exit() with CPU interrupts off :-( That has to be screwing with performance as well. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled., David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled., David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled., David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled., David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |