Steven, I guess I need to actually read the patch before asking the questions... I'll try later, but On 02/03, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > --- linux-rt.git.orig/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S > +++ linux-rt.git/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S > @@ -1391,6 +1391,14 @@ paranoid_userspace: > paranoid_schedule: > TRACE_IRQS_ON > ENABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_ANY) > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL > + GET_THREAD_INFO(%rcx) > + movl TI_flags(%rcx),%ebx > + testl $_TIF_FORCE_SIG_TRAP,%ebx > + jz paranoid_do_schedule > + call do_force_sig_trap > +paranoid_do_schedule: > +#endif Stupid question. Do we really need to send the signal from here? Why force_sig(rt => T) can't set TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME instead? Then we can change do_notify_resume() to check TIF_FORCE_SIG_TRAP. And perhaps we can even avoid the new TIF_FORCE_SIG_TRAP, we could check task->stored_info_set. In fact I feel this can be simplified even more, but I am not sure. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable-rt" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
