[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7040a36b-b74a-41df-bd84-093b0e97a6b4@linux.dev>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:18:01 -0400
From: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org,
patches@...nelci.org, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, jonathanh@...dia.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com, srw@...dewatkins.net,
rwarsow@....de, conor@...nel.org, allen.lkml@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
maco@...roid.com, tglx@...utronix.de, christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 000/175] 4.19.312-rc1 review
On 4/12/24 16:10, Sean Anderson wrote:
> On 4/12/24 15:46, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
>>> soc: fsl: qbman: Use raw spinlock for cgr_lock
>>
>> As we don't have commit ef2a8d5478b9 ("net: dpaa: Adjust queue depth
>> on rate change") in 4.19, we should not really need this.
Sorry, I missed this the first time around, but this bug will still
occur (just much more rarely) without this commit.
--Sean
> Plus, 10msec
>> under raw spinlock is quite evil, such kernel is not realtime any
>> more. We should not be doing that.
>
> Patches welcome :)
>
> At some point I will try and revisit this.
>
> --Sean
Powered by blists - more mailing lists