[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241024161759.GF9767@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 18:18:00 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...il.com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>, airlied@...hat.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, will@...nel.org,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, wedsonaf@...il.com,
Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>, aliceryhl@...gle.com,
Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>
Subject: Re: [POC 1/6] irq & spin_lock: Add counted interrupt
disabling/enabling
On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 04:44:02PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
> I like this so far (at least, assuming we consider making
> raw_spin_lock_irq_disable() and enable() temporary names, and then following
> up with some automated conversions across the kernel using coccinelle).
Well, I hated adding a 3rd spinlock API enough that I tried replacing
the whole of irqsave/irqrestore with this thing in one go, and that is
utterly failing to boot :-(
Coccinelle isn't going to help I'm afraid.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists