On Sun, 2021-07-25 at 16:16 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 7/25/21 4:09 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Sat, 2021-07-24 at 00:39 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > > > > > If not, then I would expect this to work (I don't think they ever nest > > > in the opposite order, also lockdep should tell us instead of > > > -ENOBOOT?), but might be missing something... > > > > Yeah, like #ifndef CONFIG_PREMPT_RT at the bottom of the loop that our > > useless damn eyeballs auto-correct instead of reporting :) > > Well doh, good catch. I never did see it. I got sick of saying "but but but", and did make mm/slub.i, which made it glow. > Hope fixing that helps then? Yeah, though RT should perhaps be pinned across release/re-acquire? Actually, local locks should rediscover the recursion handling skills they long had so such RT specific hole poking isn't necessary. There previously would have been no ifdef+typo there for eyeballs to miss and miss and miss. -Mike
