[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1193690270.9928.35.camel@pasglop>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 07:37:50 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tony@...eyournoodle.com,
paulus@...ba.org, dino@...ibm.com, tytso@...ibm.com,
dvhltc@...ibm.com, antonb@...ibm.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
niv@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] hacks to allow -rt to run kernbench on POWER
On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 13:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > I see a lot of case where you add preempt_disable/enable around
> areas
> > that have the PTE lock held...
> >
> > So in -rt, spin_lock doesn't disable preempt ? I'm a bit worried...
> > there are some strong requirements that anything within that lock is
> not
> > preempted, so zap_pte_ranges() is the obvious ones but all of them
> would
> > need to be addressed.
>
> Right in one! One of the big changes in -rt is that spinlock critical
> sections (and RCU read-side critical sections, for that matter) are
> preemptible under CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT.
>
> And I agree that this patchset will have missed quite a few places
> where
> additional changes are required. Hence the word "including" above,
> rather
> than something like "specifically". ;-)
Ok, well, I'm pretty familiar with that MM code since I wrote a good
deal of the current version so I'll try to spend some time with your
patch have a look. It may have to wait for next week though, but feel
free to ping me if you don't hear back, in case it falls through the
hole in my brain :-)
Ben.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists