From: Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: stable-rt@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>,
Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 0/1] Linux v4.19.312-rt134-rc2
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 13:11:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6irersxerqltgzv63uis2rint4ycugtr7uve7j4bbvaccogxf6@qvfg6plzrvsx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240507095407.jAjEuCJ8@linutronix.de>
Hi Sebastian,
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 11:54:07AM GMT, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> I compared mine outcome vs v4.19-rt-next and the diff at the bottom came
> out:
>
> - timer_delete_sync() used to have "#if 0" block around
> lockdep_assert_preemption_enabled() because the function is not part
> of v4.19. You ended up with might_sleep() which is a minor change.
> Your queue as of a previous release had the if0 block (in
> __del_timer_sync()).
> I would say this is minor but looks like a miss-merge. Therefore I
> would say it should go back for consistency vs previous release and
> not change it due to conflicts.
Makes sense.
> - The timer_delete_sync() is structured differently with
> __del_timer_sync(). That function invokes timer_sync_wait_running()
> which drops two locks which are not acquired. That is wrong. It should
> have been del_timer_wait_running().
Understood. I was a bit strungling here. Glad you caught this error.
> I suggest you apply the diff below to align it with later versions. It
> also gets rid of the basep argument in __try_to_del_timer_sync() which
> is not really used.
Will do.
> As an alternative I can send you my rebased queue if this makes it
> easier for you.
Yes please, this makes it easy to sync the rebase branch.
Thanks a lot!
Cheers,
Daniel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-07 11:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-06 10:46 [PATCH RT 0/1] Linux v4.19.312-rt134-rc2 Daniel Wagner
2024-05-06 10:46 ` [PATCH RT 1/1] Linux 4.19.312-rt134 Daniel Wagner
2024-05-06 11:00 ` [PATCH RT 0/1] Linux v4.19.312-rt134-rc2 Daniel Wagner
2024-05-07 9:54 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-05-07 11:11 ` Daniel Wagner [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6irersxerqltgzv63uis2rint4ycugtr7uve7j4bbvaccogxf6@qvfg6plzrvsx \
--to=wagi@monom.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=stable-rt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=williams@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).