On 2021-08-04 10:22:59 [-0600], Jens Axboe wrote: > > In that regard, I do still consider those patches out-of-tree, which > they are. And while I'm more sympathetic to them compared to other > out-of-tree code as there's a long term plan to get it all in, it's > still out-of-tree. Best solution here is probably to just carry that > particular change in the RT patchset for now. So today in the morning I learned that there is a memory allocation in an IRQ-off section and now, a patch later, it is almost gone. So that makes me actually happy :) The spin_lock_irq() vs local_irq_disable() + spin_lock() is documented in Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst. That said I have no problem by carrying that patch in the RT-patchset and revisit it later. Sebastian
