[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180718092448.v6j7wdahtsediqhh@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:24:48 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT v2] arm64: fpsimd: use a local_lock() in addition to
local_bh_disable()
On 2018-07-18 11:12:10 [+0200], To Dave Martin wrote:
> > > - if (may_use_simd()) {
> > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_BASE) && may_use_simd()) {
> >
> > I suspect this is wrong -- see comments on the commit message.
I'm sorry, I pressed send too early, I was aiming for the draft folder.
So yes, based on that EFI that might be interruptible, let me try to
look at the initial issue again and maybe I get another idea how to deal
with this.
One question: If EFI is interruptible that means, we call into EFI - how
do we get out? Does EFI enable interrupts and the kernel receives an
interrupt and treats this EFI call like a regular context switch?
> > > kernel_neon_begin();
> > > } else {
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Cheers
> > ---Dave
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists