> unless you have strong arguments against this approach, i will start
> coding this. It's a pretty intrusive change, because all current softirq
> users will have to agree on a generic event format + callback that can be
> queued. This has to be embedded into skbs and bh-handling structs. What do
> you think?
Why skbs?
Anyway, scheme sort of:
do_softirq()
{
start = jiffies;
while (dequeue()) {
if (jiffies - start > 1)
goto wakeup_ksoftirq
process();
}
}
and raise_softirq() enqueuing event to tail, if it is still not queued
is nice, not intrusive and very easy.
Only "skbs" scares me. :-)
Alexey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/