> > To break this scenario, there are two solutions, I think.
> > 1. run the bh_handler on the initial CPU.
> > 2. return the collected memory to the original slab-cache.
> I don't see an easy way to do something like this, really. There are also
> tradeoffs like the interrupt CPU may be less busy than the
> original CPU, so which one do you want to go to?
Returning to the original slab-cache is easy to implement. Original
CPU-id can be put into a control header specific to the buffer. But
this has some disadvantages: needs to revive spin-locks, block
Modifiying bh handling is better I think, but I don't really
understand how bottom half works. It is rather hard for me.
For the moment, I'll take 2.
-- Computer Systems Laboratory, Fujitsu Labs. email@example.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:15 EST