[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210714082820.GB2725@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 10:28:20 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: [patch 05/50] sched: Provide schedule point for RT locks
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 05:10:59PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -5832,8 +5832,14 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct tas
> */
> #define SM_NONE 0x0
> #define SM_PREEMPT 0x1
> -#define SM_MASK_PREEMPT UINT_MAX
> -#define SM_MASK_STATE SM_MASK_PREEMPT
> +#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> +# define SM_MASK_PREEMPT UINT_MAX
> +# define SM_MASK_STATE SM_MASK_PREEMPT
> +#else
> +# define SM_RTLOCK_WAIT 0x2
> +# define SM_MASK_PREEMPT SM_PREEMPT
> +# define SM_MASK_STATE (SM_PREEMPT | SM_RTLOCK_WAIT)
> +#endif
Wouldn't something like this:
#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
# define SM_MASK_PREEMPT (~0U)
#else
# define SM_RTLOCK_WAIT 0x2
# define SM_MASK_PREEMPT SM_PREEMPT
#endif
#define SM_MASK_STATE (~0U)
Be even better?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists