Re: [PATCH] tick/block: Add BLOCK_SOFTIRQ to the hotplug safe mask

On Thu, 17 Sep 2026 11:51:10 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Should this go via nohz, softirq or block?

I'd prefer it to go through the nohz tree since the change is in
SOFTIRQ_HOTPLUG_SAFE_MASK which lives in the NOHZ tick-stop path.

Jens, could you please have a look at this? The patch marks BLOCK_SOFTIRQ
as hotplug-safe, relying on blk_softirq_cpu_dead() to drain pending
completions during CPU offline. Just want to make sure the block layer
is comfortable with that assumption.

Thanks,
Shuaiwei