[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180727075644.lapmhyxxdb6jbaqr@linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2018 09:56:44 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT v3] arm64: fpsimd: use preemp_disable in addition to
local_bh_disable()
On 2018-07-27 05:17:23 [+0200], Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 17:06 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> >
> > @@ -1115,6 +1139,7 @@ void kernel_neon_begin(void)
> >
> > BUG_ON(!may_use_simd());
> >
> > + preempt_disable();
> > local_bh_disable();
> >
> > __this_cpu_write(kernel_neon_busy, true);
> > @@ -1131,6 +1156,7 @@ void kernel_neon_begin(void)
> > preempt_disable();
>
> Nit: this preempt_disable() could be removed...
>
> > local_bh_enable();
> > + preempt_enable();
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(kernel_neon_begin);
>
> ...instead of adding this one.
It could. I have currently no idea for the long term solution and this
keeps track what is intended to do. It might get replaced with
preempt_.*_rt()…
> -Mike
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists