On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, Julia Cartwright wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:54:15AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Julia Cartwright wrote:
> > > On PREEMPT_RT, the spinlock_t type becomes an object which sleeps under
> > > contention. The codepaths used to support scheduling (irq dispatching,
> > > arch
> > > code, the scheduler, timers) therefore must make use of the
> > > raw_spin_lock{,_irq,_irqsave}() variations which preserve the non-sleeping
> > > spinlock behavior.
> > >
> > > Because the irq_chip callbacks are invoked in the process of interrupt
> > > dispatch, they cannot therefore make use of spin_lock_t type. Instead,
> > > the
> > > usage of raw_spinlock_t is appropriate.
> > >
> > > Provide a spatch to identify (and attempt to patch) such problematic
> > > irqchip
> > > implementations.
> > >
> > > Note to those generating patches using this spatch; in order to maintain
> > > correct semantics w/ PREEMPT_RT, it is necessary to audit the
> > > raw_spinlock_t-protected codepaths to ensure their execution is bounded
> > > and
> > > minimal. This is a manual audit process.
> > >
> > > See commit 47b03ca903fb0 ("pinctrl: qcom: Use raw spinlock variants") as
> > > an
> > > example of _one_ such instance, which fixed a real bug seen in the field.
> > >
> > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Julia Cartwright <[email protected]>
> >
> > Acked-by: Julia Lawall <[email protected]>
>
> Thanks, Julia.
>
> How do these semantic patches normally land? It looks like they quite a
> few have gone through the kbuild tree, is this the norm?
Michal Marek takes care of them.
julia
>
> Thanks,
> Other Julia
>
