On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 09:25:00 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2021-11-22 15:38:56 [-0500], Steven Rostedt wrote: > > 5.10.78-rt56-rc2 stable review patch. > > If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > I don't mind releasing this as it is but could you please add the > following irq-work patches: > > * 09089db79859c irq_work: Also rcuwait for !IRQ_WORK_HARD_IRQ on PREEMPT_RT Is there something else missing here, as this gives the following rejects in irq_work.c: --- kernel/irq_work.c +++ kernel/irq_work.c @@ -217,7 +217,8 @@ void irq_work_single(void *arg) */ (void)atomic_cmpxchg(&work->node.a_flags, flags, flags & ~IRQ_WORK_BUSY); - if (!arch_irq_work_has_interrupt()) + if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && !irq_work_is_hard(work)) || + !arch_irq_work_has_interrupt()) rcuwait_wake_up(&work->irqwait); } @@ -277,7 +278,8 @@ void irq_work_sync(struct irq_work *work) lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled(); might_sleep(); - if (!arch_irq_work_has_interrupt()) { + if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && !irq_work_is_hard(work)) || + !arch_irq_work_has_interrupt()) { rcuwait_wait_event(&work->irqwait, !irq_work_is_busy(work), TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); return; And there's no test here, and no irq_work_is_hard() in 5.10-rt. This is why I didn't add them. -- Steve > * b4c6f86ec2f64 irq_work: Handle some irq_work in a per-CPU thread on PREEMPT_RT > * 810979682ccc9 irq_work: Allow irq_work_sync() to sleep if irq_work() no IRQ support. > > in a follow-up release? > > Sebastian