Re: RT patch acceptance

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > So if PREEMPT-RT would use a soft cli/sti emulation, no problem should
> > arise.
> 
> So I wonder why it doesn't do that and it leaves local_irq_disable
> uncovered [...]
>
> Perhaps that's planned and not yet implemented?

yes. As i said in an earlier mail:

> > (there are still some ways to introduce latencies into PREEMPT_RT, 
> > but they are not common and we are working on ways to cover them
> > all.)
 
local_irq_disable() is one way, preempt_disable() is another way. Adding 
asm("cli") to your driver is a third way. In practice these items are 
not a big issue, so i'm not yet covering them. It's a small detail.  
Check the amount of local-irq-disable instances in the driver space vs.  
spinlock use.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/