On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa <han...@stressinduktion.org> wrote:
> I agree here, but I don't think this patch particularly is a lot of > bloat and something very interesting people can play with and extend upon. > Sure, very rarely patch authors think their stuff is bloat. I prefer to fix kernel softirq.c, or at least show me that you tried hard enough. I am pretty sure that the following would work : When ksoftirqd is scheduled, remember this in a per cpu variable (ksoftiqd_scheduled) When enabling BH , do not call do_softirq() if this variable is set. ksoftirqd would clear the variable at the right place (probably in run_ksoftirqd()) Sure, this might add a lot of latency regressions, but lets fix them.
