[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87msmlsh41.ffs@tglx>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 12:47:58 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, John Stultz
<jstultz@...gle.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Stephen Boyd
<sboyd@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Michael
<michael@...isi.de>, kernel-team@...roid.com, Peter Zijlstra
<peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] time: alarmtimer: Use TASK_FREEZABLE to
cleanup freezer handling
Michael!
On Thu, Jun 27 2024 at 09:46, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 11:58 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>> >> This appears to be still somewhat racy, because the notifier can run
>> >> at this point AFAICS.
>> >
>> > Indeed it is. Let me think more about this.
>>
>> All of this is inherently racy as there is zero feedback whether the
>> event has been consumed or not. Making this feedback based is not
>> necessarily trivial, but let me stare into that.
>>
> Sorry to come back on this topic but I would like to know, if we can
> find a way to be sure
> to not lost wakeup or if you have already addressed in some series
No. I did not take care of it as I got distracted with other important
stuff. Feel free to take up the loose ends of this thread and make it
work. I'm happy to help discussing design choices.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists