Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 15:32:05 +0100
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, luto@xxxxxxxxxx, bp@xxxxxxxxx, dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx, vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx, mgorman@xxxxxxx, rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx, jon.grimm@xxxxxxx, bharata@xxxxxxx, raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxx, boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx, konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx, jgross@xxxxxxxx, andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-m68k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>, Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-um@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Brian Cain <bcain@xxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-hexagon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Matt Turner <mattst88@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <a428516ebeae71e33635edc83052c972ce40c85d.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de>
References: <20230912082606.GB35261@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <87cyyfxd4k.ffs@tglx> <CAHk-=whnwC01m_1f-gaM1xbvvwzwTiKitrWniA-ChZv+bM03dg@mail.gmail.com> <87led2wdj0.ffs@tglx> <ZQmbhoQIINs8rLHp@casper.infradead.org> <0e69f7df80dc5878071deb0d80938138d19de1d1.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> <20230919134218.GA39281@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <a6c84803274116ec827cd4bdd4e72a8d0c304c27.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> <20230919141627.GB39281@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <a428516ebeae71e33635edc83052c972ce40c85d.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de>

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 04:24:48PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> If the conversion isn't hard, why is the first reflex the urge to remove an architecture
> instead of offering advise how to get the conversion done?

Because PREEMPT has been around since before 2005 (cc19ca86a023 created
Kconfig.preempt and I don't need to go back further than that to make my
point), and you haven't done the work yet.  Clearly it takes the threat
of removal to get some kind of motion.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
  - From: Steven Rostedt

References:
- Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sched: define TIF_ALLOW_RESCHED
  - From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sched: define TIF_ALLOW_RESCHED
  - From: Thomas Gleixner
- Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sched: define TIF_ALLOW_RESCHED
  - From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sched: define TIF_ALLOW_RESCHED
  - From: Thomas Gleixner
- Arches that don't support PREEMPT
  - From: Matthew Wilcox
- Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
  - From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
- Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
  - From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
  - From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
- Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
  - From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
  - From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz

Prev by Date: Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] sched: define TIF_ALLOW_RESCHED
Previous by thread: Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
Next by thread: Re: Arches that don't support PREEMPT
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux ARM Kernel] [Linux ARM] [Linux Omap] [Fedora ARM] [IETF Annouce] [Bugtraq] [Linux OMAP] [Linux MIPS] [eCos] [Asterisk Internet PBX] [Linux API]