On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 10:05:07AM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote: > I've got one more small remark though, the name ALLOWLIST doesn't give > justice to what you explained above. > It suggests me something potentially wrong that we can't do much about, > while in case of RT mutexes and futex lock, we just don't want the > monitor to yell in a perfectly RT-compliant scenario. > > What is happening here, from what I see, is that the kernel is handling > the RT behaviour and your monitor is just meant to tell when userspace > is doing something it could do better (unless we deal with kthreads, > there we are in fact whitelisting the ones we know are not complying). > > What about calling it RT_KERNEL_MANAGED_SLEEP or something along the > line to say we just trust what the kernel is doing?
That would also work. The generated automaton should be exactly the same. But I think this is quite subjective, so let's not argue too much about it. In short, I prefer it as is, sorry. I think "ALLOWLIST" is a suitable name. From Wikipedia: "A whitelist or allowlist is a list or register of entities that are being provided a particular privilege, service, mobility, access or recognition. Entities on the list will be accepted, approved and/or recognized". We trust rt_mutex and futex_lock_pi to do the right things, so I think they belong to the allowlist. We also trust the RCU thread and the migration/ threads to be correct. Best regards, Nam
