[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710051726490.2083@nanos>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:27:30 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>
cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Dean Luick <dean.luick@...el.com>,
Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Kaike Wan <kaike.wan@...el.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian.siewior@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Sanchez <sebastian.sanchez@...el.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] IB/hfi1: Use preempt_{dis,en}able_nort()
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017, Julia Cartwright wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 12:49:19PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > - preempt_disable();
> > + preempt_disable_nort();
> > this_cpu_inc(*sc->buffers_allocated);
>
> Have you tried this on RT w/ CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT? I believe that the
> this_cpu_* operations perform a preemption check, which we'd trip.
Good point. Changing this to migrate_disable() would do the trick.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists