On 2020-11-16 17:19, Björn Töpel wrote:
On 2020-11-16 17:04, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:04:07 +0100 Björn Töpel wrote:
@@ -6771,6 +6806,19 @@ static int napi_poll(struct napi_struct *n,
struct list_head *repoll)
if (likely(work < weight))
goto out_unlock;
+ /* The NAPI context has more processing work, but busy-polling
+ * is preferred. Exit early.
+ */
+ if (napi_prefer_busy_poll(n)) {
+ if (napi_complete_done(n, work)) {
+ /* If timeout is not set, we need to make sure
+ * that the NAPI is re-scheduled.
+ */
+ napi_schedule(n);
+ }
+ goto out_unlock;
+ }
Why is this before the disabled check?
This path is when the budget was exceeded (more work to be done). If the
prefer flag is set, the napi loop is exited prematurely. We check the
return value for napi_complete_done, to make sure that there is actually
a TO value set.
Uhm, maybe I not following what you mean by the "disabled check".
Ok, too little coffee.
Yeah, maybe it would make sense to have the disabled check *before* the
"prefer"-checking.
Björn
