[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1427251080.3459.8.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 03:38:00 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke <thavatchai.makpahibulchoke@...com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Carsten Emde <C.Emde@...dl.org>,
John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 2/4] Revert "timers: do not raise softirq
unconditionally"
On Tue, 2015-03-24 at 19:15 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> * Mike Galbraith | 2015-03-21 19:02:23 [+0100]:
>
> >> Steve, I'm still working on the fix we discussed using dummy irq_task.
> >> I should be able to submit some time next week, if still interested.
> >>
> >> Either that, or I think we should remove the function
> >> spin_do_trylock_in_interrupt() to prevent any possibility of running
> >> into similar problems in the future.
> >
> >Why can't we just Let swapper be the owner when in irq with no dummy?
>
> so you abuse the owner to be swapper and mask it out everywhere. It does
> not look like a final solution. I'm more inclined to take you other
> patch. In the end I hope we get a timer re-work and do not need any
> hackary around it…
Yeah, it was just _a_ way to dodge the bullet.
-Mike
--
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