Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Jan 2021 11:50:37 -0800 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Quick review of RCU-related patches in v5.10.8-rt23 |
| |
Hello, Sebastian,
Just doing my periodic (but decidedly non-real-time) scan of RCU-related patches in -rt, in this case v5.10.8-rt23:
db93e2f1b4b0 ("rcu: Prevent false positive softirq warning on RT") Looks ready for mainline, given CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT. f3541b467fbb ("sched: Do not account rcu_preempt_depth on RT in might_sleep()") If the scheduler maintainers are OK with their part of this patch, looks good to me, given CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT. Feel free to add: Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@ekernel.org> d8c5a7d75e08 ("rcutorture: Avoid problematic critical section nesting on RT") This one I need to understand better. I do like the use of local variables to make the "if" conditions less unruly.
The rest are in -rcu already:
a163ef8687a1 ("rcu: make RCU_BOOST default on RT") Commit 2341bc4a0311 in -rcu. In yesterday's pull request. 5ffd75a96828 ("rcu: Use rcuc threads on PREEMPT_RT as we did") Commit 8b9a0ecc7ef5 in -rcu. In yesterday's pull request. e0b671bca2e7 ("rcu: enable rcu_normal_after_boot by default for RT") Commit 36221e109eb2 in -rcu. In yesterday's pull request. e27ef68731a1 ("rcu: Don't invoke try_invoke_on_locked_down_task() with irqs disabled") This one is in v5.10 mainline.
Any reason I shouldn't pull in db93e2f1b4b0 ("rcu: Prevent false positive softirq warning on RT") for v5.13?
Thanx, Paul
| |