[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y7/inz5ZoQiR3bP3@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 11:36:15 +0100
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Adrien Thierry <athierry@...hat.com>,
Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] PM: domains: Add GENPD_FLAG_RT_SAFE for PREEMPT_RT
On 2023-01-06 15:52:57 [+0100], Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > Just so I don't get this wrong, since the cpuidle-psci also calls
> > pm_runtime_* functions so it isn't PREEMPT_RT safe, at least not yet?
>
> You are correct. Patch 3 here addresses it by... just not doing runtime
> PM. This is a hacky workaround but:
> 1. I don't have any other idea,
> 2. It's not a big problem because RT systems are not supposed to have
> any CPU idle (one of first things during RT system tuning is to disable
> cpuidle).
so you say you use idle=poll instead?
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists