[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87cytzaqdj.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 11:33:04 +0106
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To: Leonardo Bras <leobras@...hat.com>
Cc: Leonardo Bras <leobras@...hat.com>, Ilpo Järvinen
<ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>, Thomas
Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Florian Fainelli
<f.fainelli@...il.com>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Marcelo Tosatti
<mtosatti@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-serial
<linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND RFC PATCH v1 2/2] serial/8250: Avoid getting lock in RT
atomic context
On 2024-01-18, Leonardo Bras <leobras@...hat.com> wrote:
> Sure, please let me know of where can I find the latest PREEMPT_RT
> patch series so I can re-test my bug. By what you comment, it's higly
> probable that patch 2/2 will not be necessary.
Some links for you:
The Real-Time Wiki at the Linux Foundation:
https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/realtime/
The latest development RT patch series for 6.7:
https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/6.7/patches-6.7-rt6.tar.xz
RT git (branch linux-6.7.y-rt-rebase is probably what you want):
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rt/linux-rt-devel.git
> On the other hand, unless some extra work was done in preventing the
> scenario in patch 1/2, I think that can still be discussed.
I agree. Thanks for looking into this.
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists