* Brian Silverman | 2015-08-17 18:41:55 [-0700]: >Chained IRQ handlers are always marked IRQ_NOTHREAD, which means >forced threading doesn't apply to them. I think this means they can't >safely use non-raw spinlocks under CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL. Is this >correct? yes, >I have an ARM system with a CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL kernel which prints >lockdep warnings from many places because of this. It also locks up >under moderate load, which I think is related to this issue. Any >suggestions? Use raw locks there. The chain handler usually implement a irq chip something like gpio controller which can also act as an interrupt controller. If this is the case then the lock should be a raw-lock. You should not do anything time consuming while holding the lock. It is usually just held while masking/unmasking bits in the registers. >Thanks, >Brian Silverman Sebastia -- 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
