[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250409123944.15df8714@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 12:39:44 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Clark Williams
<clrkwllms@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, David Vernet
<dvernet@...a.com>, Barret Rhoden <brho@...gle.com>, Josh Don
<joshdon@...gle.com>, Crystal Wood <crwood@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev, Juri Lelli
<juri.lelli@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if
pi_blocked_on is set
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 13:27:12 -0300
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) || preemptible()) {
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> > > + if (!preemptible() || current->pi_blocked_on)
> > > + defer = true;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Why add the ugly #ifdef back?
> >
> > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) ||
> > (preemptible() && !current->pi_blocked_on)) {
>
> I had to add the #ifdef to avoid the build failing if CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES is
> not set. I do know SMP, FUTEX, I2C, PSTORE and a few more things depend on
> CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES being enabled, but I opted for being thorough.
>
> I would be more than glad getting rid of the #ifdef and simplifying the patch
> if that possible build failure is not a case to worry about, if RT_MUTEXES are
> always enabled nowadays.
>
Because pi_blocked_on is only defined when CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES is enabled?
OK, then perhaps we should add in sched.h:
#ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES
static inline bool tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(struct task_struct *tsk)
{
return tsk->pi_blocked_on != NULL;
}
#else
static inline bool tsk_is_pi_blocked_on(strut task_struct *tsk)
{
return false;
}
#endif
??
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists