On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 12:37:54PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > __raise_softirq_irqoff() adds a bit to the pending sofirq mask and this > is it. The softirq won't be handled in a deterministic way but randomly > when an interrupt fires and handles softirq in its irq_exit() routine or > if something randomly checks and handles pending softirqs in the call > chain before the CPU goes idle. > > Add a local_bh_disable/enable() around the IRQ-off section which will > handle pending softirqs. This patch leaves me extremely confused, and it would even more if I was just reading the code. local_irq_disable is supposed to disable BHs as well, so the code looks pretty much nonsensical to me. But apparently that isn't the point if I follow your commit message as you don't care about an extra level of BH disabling but want to force a side-effect of the re-enabling? Why not directly call the helper to schedule the softirq then?
