On Sun, 15 Dec 2013, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Nicholas Mc Guire | 2013-11-30 07:47:55 [+0100]: > > >given that the broken patch was disabling once and enabling potentially a > >number of times it should have triggert the > >WARN_ON_ONCE(p->migrate_disable <= 0); in migrate_enable() if the recursive > >case would have ever bin hit... so much to testing and locking... > > And is why I removed the line > > No change of functionality > > from the change log because it was not obvious to me that is a > zero-change patch :) well that was the intent and obviously it was not the case - so it served its purpose to document the intent. > > Are you going to redo this one? > no - as David Miller stated clearly that he sees these split-api locks as a valid idiom and there were clear worries that this would break in the future I see no point in pushing this. The alternative of removing the recursive migrate_disable/enable in local_bh_* directly is good enough I guess - see: 0001-make-migrate-disable-enable-conditioned-on-softirq_n.patch thx! hofrat -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
