[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210826134039.GG4148@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 14:40:39 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Cc: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: "BUG: Invalid wait context" in ls_extirq_set_type
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:01:31AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> I don't know what the right fix is. Am I right when a say that for !RT,
> spinlock==raw_spinlock? If so, switching regmap's spinlock to
> raw_spinlock would be nop for !RT and fix this issue, but would of
> course have quite far-reaching effects on RT kernels.
Note that regmap doesn't have a fixed kind of locking used for all
regmaps, the individual regmaps can select which (if any) kind of lock
they want to use on a per-regmap basis. Adding raw_spinlock support
wouldn't affect any regmap that doesn't actively select raw spinlocks.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists