On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:56:09PM +0800, [email protected] wrote: > +/* > + * The pending_next_bit is recorded for the next processing order when > + * the loop is broken. This per cpu variable is to solve the following > + * scenarios:
This, that adds all that complexity, and I think it's wrong. The softirqs are priority ordered. Running then again from 0 up if/when you break seems 'right'.
