On Tue, Sep 15 2020 at 20:10, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 01:08:31PM +0300, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>> But making atomic kmap preemptible/sleepable creates the exact same
>> problem, i.e., that we have no idea which existing callers are
>> currently relying on those preemption disabling semantics, so we can't
>> just take them away. Or am I missing something?
>
> Good point.
>
> Thomas mentioned that RT has been doing this for a while now so
> perhaps someone has studied this problem already? Thomas?
RT is substituting preempt_disable() with migrate_disable() which pins
the task on the CPU so that per CPU stuff still works. And we did quite
some staring whether there is code which purely relies on the
preempt_disable() to prevent reentrancy, but there is almost none.
Though we don't have migrate disable on !RT and PeterZ is not a great
fan of making it available as it wreckages schedulability - though IMO
not much more than preempt disable :)
Thanks,
tglx
