[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241203102047.5844de81@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 10:20:47 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Yeo Reum Yun <YeoReum.Yun@....com>
Cc: Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>, "mike.leach@...aro.org"
<mike.leach@...aro.org>, "james.clark@...aro.org" <james.clark@...aro.org>,
"alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com" <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
"bigeasy@...utronix.de" <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, "clrkwllms@...nel.org"
<clrkwllms@...nel.org>, "coresight@...ts.linaro.org"
<coresight@...ts.linaro.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev"
<linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev>, nd <nd@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] coresight: change coresight_device lock type to
raw_spinlock_t
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 08:31:54 +0000
Yeo Reum Yun <YeoReum.Yun@....com> wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> > Still should be documented somewhere. It should describe the maximum number
> > of feats that will ever be loaded. If there's a max, it makes it back to
> > O(1). With a 'k' of how long it takes to process the max number of feats.
>
> But with other patchset seems better
> since not only this function, but also for other functions too.
Which other patchset?
>
> BTW, is there any example describing this I can refer?
No, it's on our todo list for RT. To document the RT behavior of the
kernel. This is just one location.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists