LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: 王擎 <wangqing@vivo.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re:Re: [PATCH,RESEND] softirq: Introduce SOFTIRQ_FORCED_THREADING
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 16:07:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wno5hdcp.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AJ*AdQAQD9tzCOr4iYm-E4pL.3.1630117097688.Hmail.wangqing@vivo.com>

Qing,

On Sat, Aug 28 2021 at 10:18, 王擎 wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 23 2021 at 11:33, Wang Qing wrote:
>> What you are proposing here is completly different as you enforce
>> softirq execution in context of ksoftirqd only.
>
> Thank you for reply and explanation, I just provide a choice to balance
> the execution of softirq according to their own business scenarios.

That's not a choice. Forced interrupt threading is a boot-time option
and not a compile time boolean. So with your change you even changed the
behaviour of the kernel when your magic config switch is not selected by
the user.

>> What are you referring to? PREEMPT_RT does not modify the priority of
>> ksoftirqd. If system designers want to do that, then they can do so from
>> user space. 
>
> I refer to the kernel-3.14 RT Patches. I used it at that time and achieved 
> very good results.

There is a reason why RT does not use this anymore and switched to a
different model. As I said before. Just because it works for you, it's
not necessarily a solution which should be exposed for general
consumption.

> I remember where I saw that softirqd was split into the original process 
> and the RT process. This can partially solve my problem.

Your patch has absolutely nothing to do with that. You just picked some
random part out of those 7+ years old patches and then claim that it's
something RT does, which is just not true.

Thanks,

        tglx


      reply	other threads:[~2021-08-28 14:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-23  3:33 Wang Qing
2021-08-23  4:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-08-23  6:33   ` 王擎
2021-08-23  7:43     ` Mike Galbraith
2021-08-27 22:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-28  2:18   ` 王擎
2021-08-28 14:07     ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87wno5hdcp.ffs@tglx \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=dirk.behme@de.bosch.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=wangqing@vivo.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --subject='Re:Re: [PATCH,RESEND] softirq: Introduce SOFTIRQ_FORCED_THREADING' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).