[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YgQDrGaWerGM3B2C@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 18:10:52 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, ardb@...nel.org,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, frederic@...nel.org,
james.morse@....com, joey.gouly@....com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luto@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
valentin.schneider@....com, will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64: entry: centralize premeption decision
On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 03:35:34PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> For historical reasons, the decision of whether or not to preempt is
> spread across arm64_preempt_schedule_irq() and __el1_irq(), and it would
> be clearer if this were all in one place.
>
> Also, arm64_preempt_schedule_irq() calls lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled(),
> but this is redundant, as we have a subsequent identical assertion in
> __exit_to_kernel_mode(), and preempt_schedule_irq() will
> BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled()) anyway.
>
> This patch removes the redundant assertion and centralizes the
> preemption decision making within arm64_preempt_schedule_irq().
>
> Other than the slight change to assertion behaviour, there should be no
> functional change as a result of this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
> Cc: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@....com>
> Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
I acked this patch in v2, has anything changed? Well, here it is again:
Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
BTW, you have a typo in the subject.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists