> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-arm-kernel [mailto:linux-arm-kernel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > On Behalf Of Robin Murphy > Sent: 21 March 2019 15:04 > To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@xxxxxxxxxx>; > lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx > Cc: mark.rutland@xxxxxxx; vkilari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > neil.m.leeder@xxxxxxxxx; jean-philippe.brucker@xxxxxxx; > pabba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>; > will.deacon@xxxxxxx; rruigrok@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Linuxarm > <linuxarm@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Guohanjun (Hanjun Guo) > <guohanjun@xxxxxxxxxx>; andrew.murray@xxxxxxx; > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/4] perf: add arm64 smmuv3 pmu driver [...] > Ah, apologies for leading you wrong on this, but it has turned out to be > bogus - perf_pmu_register() does things for which preemption should not > be disabled, and it flares up particularly on PREEMPT_RT. For now, I > think the best thing to do is to bring the put_cpu() call up here (or > just use raw_smp_processor_id() instead) and accept that those > vanishingly-unlikely-in-practice race conditions exist until someone can > make the registration dance more robust in the perf core itself. > > Beyond that, though, I'm trusting that everything I didn't comment on > last time and doesn't appear at a glance to have changed is still good, > so with the comments above addressed, > > Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@xxxxxxx> > > FYI, both Will and Mark are out for a while, so whilst I expect v7 > should be good to merge, don't expect any maintainer final say for at > least a couple of weeks yet. > Thanks Robin. I will address the comments and sent out v7 soon. Cheers, Shameer
