When merging 5.4.55 into 5.4-rt I hit the following conflict: static void flush_backlog(struct work_struct *work) { struct sk_buff *skb, *tmp; struct softnet_data *sd; local_bh_disable(); sd = this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data); local_irq_disable(); rps_lock(sd); skb_queue_walk_safe(&sd->input_pkt_queue, skb, tmp) { if (skb->dev->reg_state == NETREG_UNREGISTERING) { __skb_unlink(skb, &sd->input_pkt_queue); <<<<<<< HEAD __skb_queue_tail(&sd->tofree_queue, skb); ======= dev_kfree_skb_irq(skb); >>>>>>> v5.4.55 input_queue_head_incr(sd); } } The diff of 5.4.54 -> 5.4.55 of this code is: --- a/net/core/dev.c +++ b/net/core/dev.c @@ -5229,7 +5229,7 @@ static void flush_backlog(struct work_struct *work) skb_queue_walk_safe(&sd->input_pkt_queue, skb, tmp) { if (skb->dev->reg_state == NETREG_UNREGISTERING) { __skb_unlink(skb, &sd->input_pkt_queue); - kfree_skb(skb); + dev_kfree_skb_irq(skb); input_queue_head_incr(sd); } } >From upstream commit: 7df5cb75cfb8a ("dev: Defer free of skbs in flush_backlog") According to that commit, it looks like kfree_skb() shouldn't be called with irqs disabled (yeah for RT!). It now calls dev_kfree_skb_irq() which puts the skb on the softnet_data.completion_queue, and raises the NET_TX_SOFTIRQ to do the freeing. This is similar to what v5.4-rt does, which a diff of 5.4.54 -> v5.4-rt: @@ -5229,7 +5234,7 @@ static void flush_backlog(struct work_struct *work) skb_queue_walk_safe(&sd->input_pkt_queue, skb, tmp) { if (skb->dev->reg_state == NETREG_UNREGISTERING) { __skb_unlink(skb, &sd->input_pkt_queue); - kfree_skb(skb); + __skb_queue_tail(&sd->tofree_queue, skb); input_queue_head_incr(sd); } } @@ -5239,11 +5244,14 @@ static void flush_backlog(struct work_struct *work) skb_queue_walk_safe(&sd->process_queue, skb, tmp) { if (skb->dev->reg_state == NETREG_UNREGISTERING) { __skb_unlink(skb, &sd->process_queue); - kfree_skb(skb); + __skb_queue_tail(&sd->tofree_queue, skb); input_queue_head_incr(sd); } } + if (!skb_queue_empty(&sd->tofree_queue)) + raise_softirq_irqoff(NET_RX_SOFTIRQ); local_bh_enable(); + } Where we are doing something slightly different. Placing the skb on the sd->tofree_queue and raising NET_RX_SOFTIQ instead. Now that the vanilla stable 5.4 kernel doesn't call kfree_skb() from irqs_disabled, can I safely revert this entire change? Is it safe to call kfree_skb() from local_bh_disable()? I'm assuming it is, but just want to clarify. I'll be continuing merging latest stable (with this revert), but please yell if you think it will break? Thanks! -- Steve