From: Atsushi Nemoto <nem...@toshiba-tops.co.jp> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 09:52:57 +0900
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 11:25:00 -0700, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >> Two lines below this change you are disabling interrupts anyways, >> so I would suggest just moving the spin_lock_irqsave() before the >> napi_gro_flush() to fix this. >> >> Many of the checks done by napi_complete_done() (invoked by >> napi_complete()) are completely redundant in this context. For >> example, the direct __napi_complete() call is a really nice >> optimization because we know we are on the poll list and therefore >> it is not empty. > > Thank you for your suggestion. > > I think napi_gro_flush() can be called with irq enabled, so moving the > spin_lock_irqsave() just before the __napi_complete() (or moving the > __napi_complete() just after the spin_lock_irqsave()) would be better, > right? It should work, yes. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
