Re: [rfc patch v4.4-rt2] sched: fix up preempt lazy forward port
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Date: 2016-01-22 12:54:54
Also in:
lkml
On 01/22/2016 12:58 PM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
On 01/18/2016 10:18 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:quoted
* Mike Galbraith | 2016-01-18 10:08:23 [+0100]:quoted
--- a/arch/x86/entry/common.c +++ b/arch/x86/entry/common.c@@ -220,14 +220,14 @@ long syscall_trace_enter(struct pt_regs#define EXIT_TO_USERMODE_LOOP_FLAGS \ (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_UPROBE | \ - _TIF_NEED_RESCHED | _TIF_USER_RETURN_NOTIFY) + _TIF_NEED_RESCHED_MASK | _TIF_USER_RETURN_NOTIFY)If I read this right, the loop where this define is used _TIF_ALLWORK_MASK in v4.1 of which _TIF_NEED_RESCHED_MASK was part of. Adding this will reassmeble the old behaviour. …Just a question (sorry if dumb). ARM has _TIF_WORK_MASK defined: #define _TIF_WORK_MASK (_TIF_NEED_RESCHED | _TIF_SIGPENDING | \ _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_UPROBE) which is used to calculate loop exit condition in do_work_pending() (arch/arm/kernel/signal.c). Should _TIF_WORK_MASK also contain _TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY?
Yes, and arm64 lacks the same bits. Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html