[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250610110205.1111719-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:02:03 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/1] local_lock: Move this_cpu_ptr() notation from internal to main header
While looking at what needs extra locks for PREEMPT_RT in order to rid
of the lock in local_bh_disable() I stumbled uppon two users which need
to lock the structure but the pointer is no longer per_cpu.
The moves this_cpu_ptr() from the internal header to the main one in order to
free the name space and have the __ prefix function to do the same but without
the this_cpu_ptr(). This gives us
local_lock_nested_bh() -> on per-CPU memory
__local_lock_nested_bh() -> on local memory.
This change has been made to all local_lock*() functions.
I made an example for the crypto user
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250514110750.852919-3-bigeasy@linutronix.de/
and would route if via crypto once this is accepted.
v1…v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250514110750.852919-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de/
- Repost without the crypto user.
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior (1):
local_lock: Move this_cpu_ptr() notation from internal to main header.
include/linux/local_lock.h | 20 +++++++++----------
include/linux/local_lock_internal.h | 30 ++++++++++++++---------------
2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
--
2.49.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists