On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 00:59:25 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:52 AM Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> wrote: > > Interesting, vger seems to be CCed but it isn't appearing on the ML. > > Perhaps just a vger delay :S > > > > Not really upsetting. I'm just trying to share what I learned devising > > more advanced pollers. The bits get really messy really quickly. > > Especially that the proposed fix adds a bit for a poor bystander (busy > > poll) while it's the threaded IRQ that is incorrectly not preserving > > its ownership. > > > > > Additional 16 bytes here, possibly in a shared cache line, [1] > > > I prefer using a bit in hot n->state, we have plenty of them available. > > > > Right, presumably the location of the new member could be optimized. > > I typed this proposal up in a couple of minutes. > > > > > We worked hours with Alexander, Wei, I am sorry you think we did a poor > > > job. > > > I really thought we instead solved the issue at hand. > > > > > > May I suggest you defer your idea of redesigning the NAPI model for > > > net-next ? > > > > Seems like you decided on this solution off list and now the fact that > > there is a discussion on the list is upsetting you. May I suggest that > > discussions should be conducted on list to avoid such situations? > > We were trying to not pollute the list (with about 40 different emails so far) > > (Note this was not something I initiated, I only hit Reply all button) > > OK, I will shut up, since you seem to take over this matter, and it is > 1am here in France.
Are you okay with adding a SCHED_THREADED bit for threaded NAPI to be set in addition to SCHED? At least that way the bit is associated with it's user. IIUC since the extra clear_bit() in busy poll was okay so should be a new set_bit()?
