lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RT 2/4] Revert "timers: do not raise softirq unconditionally"
* Steven Rostedt | 2015-03-19 12:26:11 [-0400]:

>On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 09:17:09 +0100
>Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> (aw crap, let's go shopping)... so why is the one in timer.c ok?
>
>It's not. Sebastian, you said there were no other cases of rt_mutexes
>being taken in hard irq context. Looks like timer.c has one.

If you refer to switch_timer_base() then this one is not taken in
hard-irq context. The callchain is:

lock_timer_base() (with spin_lock_irqsave(&base->lock, *flags) which
makes it a sleeping lock or lockdep would scream)
-> switch_timer_base()
-> spin_trylock() (not in hardirq conteyt)

>So perhaps the real fix is to get that special case of ownership in
>hard interrupt context?

I'm really not sure we want to keep doing this.

>
>-- Steve

Sebastian


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-24 19:21    [W:2.069 / U:0.760 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site