[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dea92bd5-65e5-4c5c-bc93-5bef547c935e@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 12:06:43 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparc/pci: Make pci_poke_lock a raw_spinlock_t.
On 11/25/24 11:33, Waiman Long wrote:
[ ... ]
>> Fixing that finally gives me a clean run. Nevertheless, that makes me wonder:
>> Should I just disable CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING for sparc runtime tests ?
>
> If no one is tryng to ever enable PREEMPT_RT on SPARC, I suppose you could disable CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING to avoid the trouble.
>
SGTM. I'll do that unless someone gives me a good reason to keep it enabled.
Thanks,
Guenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists