On 2018-06-10 06:59:32 [+0200], Mike Galbraith wrote: > Was dropping this patch unintentional? > > (met the gripe in my tip-rt5 tree, so resurrected it) Not sure. I remember the local_irq_save() block was dealing with counters only and it was safe to drop it. The schedule_work_on() part is obvious (not to mention the possible latency part). So that css_put() is not a problem? I'm mostly curious in the callback which would run irq-off section. How does not get into that code path anyway, is there something in the LTP that would trigger that? Sebastian -- 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
