On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 02:42:57PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 04:44 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > So the safest way to fix this is to unconditionally call do_softirq() > > from irq_exit(). > > A performance penalty may come along but safety primes. > > > > We should probably do that and work on longer term solutions (Kconfig > > based arch switch, etc...) > > for the next merge window? > > As you prefer, though I'm keen on getting the "fast" version in RHEL7 if > RH will take it :-)
So what is the fast version? Converting __do_softirq() to do_softirq() unconditionally. RH will accept any fix that goes upstream. > > From the generic code POV, it's a one-liner #ifdef to select between > do_softirq and __do_softirq() right ? Then it's up to the arch to > #define I_CAN_DO_FAST ! I'd rather say #define I_CAN_DO_SAFE :) But I guess the kind of symbol we want is some ARCH_HAS_IRQ_STACK_LOW_HANDLER > > > I'll respin the series plus the regression fix, unless somebody has a > > better solution. > > Cheers, > Ben. > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
