On 16.10.2020 16:26, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 01:34:55PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >> I'm aware of the topic, but missing the benefits of the irqoff version >> unconditionally doesn't seem to be the best option. > > What are the benefits of the irqoff version? As far as I see it, the > only use case for that function is when the caller has _explicitly_ > disabled interrupts. > If the irqoff version wouldn't have a benefit, then I think we wouldn't have it ..
> The plain napi_schedule call will check if irqs are disabled. If they > are, it won't do anything further in that area. There is no performance > impact except for a check. > There is no such check, and in general currently attempts are made to remove usage of e.g. in_interrupt(). napi_schedule() has additional calls to local_irq_save() and local_irq_restore(). >> Needed is a function that dynamically picks the right version. > > So you want to replace a check with another check, am I right? How will > that improve anything performance-wise? >
