* [PATCHv2 0/3] Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL on arm64 @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bigeasy, ayyappa.ch.linux Cc: linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman, Anders Roxell Hi, I tested this on an arm64 juno target, and to get that to boot I had to backport the dtb from v4.0-rc6 to v3.18.11-rt7. Incorporated comments from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior and Ayyappa Ch. Cheers, Anders Anders Roxell (3): arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD arm64: Allow forced irq threading arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL arch/arm64/Kconfig | 2 ++ arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 3 +++ arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 1 + arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 13 ++++++++++--- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 2 +- 5 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 0/3] Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL on arm64 @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Hi, I tested this on an arm64 juno target, and to get that to boot I had to backport the dtb from v4.0-rc6 to v3.18.11-rt7. Incorporated comments from Sebastian Andrzej Siewior and Ayyappa Ch. Cheers, Anders Anders Roxell (3): arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD arm64: Allow forced irq threading arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL arch/arm64/Kconfig | 2 ++ arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 3 +++ arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 1 + arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 13 ++++++++++--- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 2 +- 5 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bigeasy, ayyappa.ch.linux Cc: linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman, Anders Roxell Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c index aa29ecb..70dcde6 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) } err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq, - IRQF_NOBALANCING, + IRQF_NOBALANCING | IRQF_NO_THREAD, "arm-pmu", armpmu); if (err) { pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n", -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c index aa29ecb..70dcde6 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) } err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq, - IRQF_NOBALANCING, + IRQF_NOBALANCING | IRQF_NO_THREAD, "arm-pmu", armpmu); if (err) { pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n", -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell @ 2015-05-14 15:39 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-14 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Anders Roxell, Will Deacon, Catalin Marinas Cc: ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? >--- > arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >index aa29ecb..70dcde6 100644 >--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >@@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) > } > > err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq, >- IRQF_NOBALANCING, >+ IRQF_NOBALANCING | IRQF_NO_THREAD, > "arm-pmu", armpmu); > if (err) { > pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n", Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD @ 2015-05-14 15:39 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-14 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? >--- > arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >index aa29ecb..70dcde6 100644 >--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >@@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) > } > > err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq, >- IRQF_NOBALANCING, >+ IRQF_NOBALANCING | IRQF_NO_THREAD, > "arm-pmu", armpmu); > if (err) { > pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n", Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD 2015-05-14 15:39 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-14 15:42 ` Will Deacon -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2015-05-14 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Anders Roxell, Catalin Marinas, ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: > > >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with > >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > > > >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> > Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > > Could this please go via the arm64 tree? I already acked it: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 so it will be picked up for 4.2. Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD @ 2015-05-14 15:42 ` Will Deacon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2015-05-14 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: > > >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with > >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > > > >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> > Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > > Could this please go via the arm64 tree? I already acked it: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 so it will be picked up for 4.2. Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD 2015-05-14 15:42 ` Will Deacon @ 2015-05-14 17:09 ` Kevin Hilman -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Kevin Hilman @ 2015-05-14 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Deacon, Catalin Marinas Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Anders Roxell, ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: >> >> >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with >> >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD >> > >> >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> >> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >> >> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? > > I already acked it: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 > > so it will be picked up for 4.2. Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing with a stable/3.18 based kernel. Thanks, Kevin [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD @ 2015-05-14 17:09 ` Kevin Hilman 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Kevin Hilman @ 2015-05-14 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: >> >> >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with >> >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD >> > >> >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> >> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >> >> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? > > I already acked it: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 > > so it will be picked up for 4.2. Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing with a stable/3.18 based kernel. Thanks, Kevin [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD 2015-05-14 17:09 ` Kevin Hilman @ 2015-05-14 17:10 ` Will Deacon -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2015-05-14 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kevin Hilman Cc: Catalin Marinas, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Anders Roxell, ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:09:23PM +0100, Kevin Hilman wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: > >> > >> >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with > >> >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > >> > > >> >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > >> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> > >> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > >> > >> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? > > > > I already acked it: > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 > > > > so it will be picked up for 4.2. > > Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't > find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm > just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing > with a stable/3.18 based kernel. I don't think Catalin has started putting together our for-next/core branch yet, but I'd expect it to appear there when he picks it up. Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD @ 2015-05-14 17:10 ` Will Deacon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2015-05-14 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:09:23PM +0100, Kevin Hilman wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: > >> > >> >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with > >> >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > >> > > >> >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > >> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> > >> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > >> > >> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? > > > > I already acked it: > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 > > > > so it will be picked up for 4.2. > > Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't > find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm > just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing > with a stable/3.18 based kernel. I don't think Catalin has started putting together our for-next/core branch yet, but I'd expect it to appear there when he picks it up. Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD 2015-05-14 17:10 ` Will Deacon @ 2015-05-14 17:19 ` Kevin Hilman -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Kevin Hilman @ 2015-05-14 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Deacon Cc: Kevin Hilman, Catalin Marinas, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Anders Roxell, ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:09:23PM +0100, Kevin Hilman wrote: [...] >> Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't >> find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm >> just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing >> with a stable/3.18 based kernel. > > I don't think Catalin has started putting together our for-next/core branch > yet, but I'd expect it to appear there when he picks it up. Cool, thanks. Kevin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD @ 2015-05-14 17:19 ` Kevin Hilman 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Kevin Hilman @ 2015-05-14 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:09:23PM +0100, Kevin Hilman wrote: [...] >> Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't >> find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm >> just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing >> with a stable/3.18 based kernel. > > I don't think Catalin has started putting together our for-next/core branch > yet, but I'd expect it to appear there when he picks it up. Cool, thanks. Kevin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD 2015-05-14 17:10 ` Will Deacon @ 2015-05-14 17:24 ` Catalin Marinas -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Catalin Marinas @ 2015-05-14 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Deacon Cc: Kevin Hilman, Anders Roxell, ayyappa.ch.linux, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, kevin.hilman, linux-arm-kernel, linux-rt-users On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:10:56PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:09:23PM +0100, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: > > >> > > >> >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with > > >> >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > > >> > > > >> >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > > >> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> > > >> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > > >> > > >> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? > > > > > > I already acked it: > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 > > > > > > so it will be picked up for 4.2. > > > > Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't > > find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm > > just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing > > with a stable/3.18 based kernel. > > I don't think Catalin has started putting together our for-next/core branch > yet, but I'd expect it to appear there when he picks it up. I'll push it out after -rc4 (i.e. next week). -- Catalin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD @ 2015-05-14 17:24 ` Catalin Marinas 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Catalin Marinas @ 2015-05-14 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:10:56PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:09:23PM +0100, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:08 [+0200]: > > >> > > >> >Mark the PMU interrupts as non-threadable, as is the case with > > >> >arch/arm: d9c3365 ARM: 7813/1: Mark pmu interupt IRQF_NO_THREAD > > >> > > > >> >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > > >> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> > > >> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> > > >> > > >> Could this please go via the arm64 tree? > > > > > > I already acked it: > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/23/161 > > > > > > so it will be picked up for 4.2. > > > > Which tree is at applied to? I'm not seeing it in -next, and couldn't > > find it in any branches of the arm64 tree[1]. Sorry to pester, I'm > > just looking to cherry-pick it from it's proper upstream for testing > > with a stable/3.18 based kernel. > > I don't think Catalin has started putting together our for-next/core branch > yet, but I'd expect it to appear there when he picks it up. I'll push it out after -rc4 (i.e. next week). -- Catalin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 2/3] arm64: Allow forced irq threading 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bigeasy, ayyappa.ch.linux Cc: linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman, Anders Roxell Now its safe to allow forced interrupt threading for arm64, all timer interrupts and the perf interrupt are marked NO_THREAD, as is the case with arch/arm: da0ec6f ARM: 7814/2: Allow forced irq threading Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> --- arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig index 9532f8d..3708eec 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ config ARM64 select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS select IRQ_DOMAIN + select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING select MODULES_USE_ELF_RELA select NO_BOOTMEM select OF -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 2/3] arm64: Allow forced irq threading @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Now its safe to allow forced interrupt threading for arm64, all timer interrupts and the perf interrupt are marked NO_THREAD, as is the case with arch/arm: da0ec6f ARM: 7814/2: Allow forced irq threading Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> --- arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig index 9532f8d..3708eec 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ config ARM64 select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS select IRQ_DOMAIN + select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING select MODULES_USE_ELF_RELA select NO_BOOTMEM select OF -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 2/3] arm64: Allow forced irq threading 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell @ 2015-05-14 15:40 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-14 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Anders Roxell, Will Deacon, Catalin Marinas Cc: ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:09 [+0200]: >Now its safe to allow forced interrupt threading for arm64, >all timer interrupts and the perf interrupt are marked NO_THREAD, as is >the case with arch/arm: da0ec6f ARM: 7814/2: Allow forced irq threading > >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Please, could this go via the ARM64 tree? >--- > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >index 9532f8d..3708eec 100644 >--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig >+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ config ARM64 > select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE > select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS > select IRQ_DOMAIN >+ select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING > select MODULES_USE_ELF_RELA > select NO_BOOTMEM > select OF Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 2/3] arm64: Allow forced irq threading @ 2015-05-14 15:40 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-14 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:09 [+0200]: >Now its safe to allow forced interrupt threading for arm64, >all timer interrupts and the perf interrupt are marked NO_THREAD, as is >the case with arch/arm: da0ec6f ARM: 7814/2: Allow forced irq threading > >Suggested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> >Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> Acked-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Please, could this go via the ARM64 tree? >--- > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >index 9532f8d..3708eec 100644 >--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig >+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ config ARM64 > select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE > select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS > select IRQ_DOMAIN >+ select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING > select MODULES_USE_ELF_RELA > select NO_BOOTMEM > select OF Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bigeasy, ayyappa.ch.linux Cc: linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman, Anders Roxell arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, thread information structure definitions, and associated data tables have to be extended to provide this support. Then the Kconfig file has to be extended to indicate the support is available, and also to indicate that support for full RT preemption is now available. Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> --- arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 3 +++ arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 1 + arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 13 ++++++++++--- 4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig index 3708eec..06995bc 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ config ARM64 select HAVE_PERF_REGS select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE + select HAVE_PREEMPT_LAZY select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS select IRQ_DOMAIN select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h index 459bf8e..3e24ea1 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ struct thread_info { struct exec_domain *exec_domain; /* execution domain */ struct restart_block restart_block; int preempt_count; /* 0 => preemptable, <0 => bug */ + int preempt_lazy_count; /* 0 => preemptable, <0 => bug */ int cpu; /* cpu */ }; @@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ static inline struct thread_info *current_thread_info(void) #define TIF_NEED_RESCHED 1 #define TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME 2 /* callback before returning to user */ #define TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE 3 /* CPU's FP state is not current's */ +#define TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY 4 #define TIF_NOHZ 7 #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE 8 #define TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT 9 @@ -124,6 +126,7 @@ static inline struct thread_info *current_thread_info(void) #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED (1 << TIF_NEED_RESCHED) #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME (1 << TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) #define _TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE (1 << TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE) +#define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY (1 << TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY) #define _TIF_NOHZ (1 << TIF_NOHZ) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c index 9a9fce0..f774136 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ int main(void) BLANK(); DEFINE(TI_FLAGS, offsetof(struct thread_info, flags)); DEFINE(TI_PREEMPT, offsetof(struct thread_info, preempt_count)); + DEFINE(TI_PREEMPT_LAZY, offsetof(struct thread_info, preempt_lazy_count)); DEFINE(TI_ADDR_LIMIT, offsetof(struct thread_info, addr_limit)); DEFINE(TI_TASK, offsetof(struct thread_info, task)); DEFINE(TI_EXEC_DOMAIN, offsetof(struct thread_info, exec_domain)); diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S index 726b910..b324d45 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S @@ -347,11 +347,16 @@ el1_irq: #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT get_thread_info tsk ldr w24, [tsk, #TI_PREEMPT] // get preempt count - cbnz w24, 1f // preempt count != 0 + cbnz w24, 2f // preempt count != 0 ldr x0, [tsk, #TI_FLAGS] // get flags - tbz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, 1f // needs rescheduling? - bl el1_preempt + tbnz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, 1f // needs rescheduling? + + ldr w24, [tsk, #TI_PREEMPT_LAZY] // get preempt lazy count + cbnz w24, 2f // preempt lazy count != 0 + tbz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY, 2f // needs rescheduling? 1: + bl el1_preempt +2: #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS bl trace_hardirqs_on @@ -365,6 +370,7 @@ el1_preempt: 1: bl preempt_schedule_irq // irq en/disable is done inside ldr x0, [tsk, #TI_FLAGS] // get new tasks TI_FLAGS tbnz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, 1b // needs rescheduling? + tbnz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY, 1b // needs rescheduling? ret x24 #endif @@ -601,6 +607,7 @@ fast_work_pending: str x0, [sp, #S_X0] // returned x0 work_pending: tbnz x1, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, work_resched + tbnz x1, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY, work_resched /* TIF_SIGPENDING, TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME or TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE case */ ldr x2, [sp, #S_PSTATE] mov x0, sp // 'regs' -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL @ 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-04-27 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, thread information structure definitions, and associated data tables have to be extended to provide this support. Then the Kconfig file has to be extended to indicate the support is available, and also to indicate that support for full RT preemption is now available. Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> --- arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 3 +++ arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 1 + arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 13 ++++++++++--- 4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig index 3708eec..06995bc 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ config ARM64 select HAVE_PERF_REGS select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE + select HAVE_PREEMPT_LAZY select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS select IRQ_DOMAIN select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h index 459bf8e..3e24ea1 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ struct thread_info { struct exec_domain *exec_domain; /* execution domain */ struct restart_block restart_block; int preempt_count; /* 0 => preemptable, <0 => bug */ + int preempt_lazy_count; /* 0 => preemptable, <0 => bug */ int cpu; /* cpu */ }; @@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ static inline struct thread_info *current_thread_info(void) #define TIF_NEED_RESCHED 1 #define TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME 2 /* callback before returning to user */ #define TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE 3 /* CPU's FP state is not current's */ +#define TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY 4 #define TIF_NOHZ 7 #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE 8 #define TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT 9 @@ -124,6 +126,7 @@ static inline struct thread_info *current_thread_info(void) #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED (1 << TIF_NEED_RESCHED) #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME (1 << TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) #define _TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE (1 << TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE) +#define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY (1 << TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY) #define _TIF_NOHZ (1 << TIF_NOHZ) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c index 9a9fce0..f774136 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ int main(void) BLANK(); DEFINE(TI_FLAGS, offsetof(struct thread_info, flags)); DEFINE(TI_PREEMPT, offsetof(struct thread_info, preempt_count)); + DEFINE(TI_PREEMPT_LAZY, offsetof(struct thread_info, preempt_lazy_count)); DEFINE(TI_ADDR_LIMIT, offsetof(struct thread_info, addr_limit)); DEFINE(TI_TASK, offsetof(struct thread_info, task)); DEFINE(TI_EXEC_DOMAIN, offsetof(struct thread_info, exec_domain)); diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S index 726b910..b324d45 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S @@ -347,11 +347,16 @@ el1_irq: #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT get_thread_info tsk ldr w24, [tsk, #TI_PREEMPT] // get preempt count - cbnz w24, 1f // preempt count != 0 + cbnz w24, 2f // preempt count != 0 ldr x0, [tsk, #TI_FLAGS] // get flags - tbz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, 1f // needs rescheduling? - bl el1_preempt + tbnz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, 1f // needs rescheduling? + + ldr w24, [tsk, #TI_PREEMPT_LAZY] // get preempt lazy count + cbnz w24, 2f // preempt lazy count != 0 + tbz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY, 2f // needs rescheduling? 1: + bl el1_preempt +2: #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS bl trace_hardirqs_on @@ -365,6 +370,7 @@ el1_preempt: 1: bl preempt_schedule_irq // irq en/disable is done inside ldr x0, [tsk, #TI_FLAGS] // get new tasks TI_FLAGS tbnz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, 1b // needs rescheduling? + tbnz x0, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY, 1b // needs rescheduling? ret x24 #endif @@ -601,6 +607,7 @@ fast_work_pending: str x0, [sp, #S_X0] // returned x0 work_pending: tbnz x1, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED, work_resched + tbnz x1, #TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY, work_resched /* TIF_SIGPENDING, TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME or TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE case */ ldr x2, [sp, #S_PSTATE] mov x0, sp // 'regs' -- 2.1.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell @ 2015-05-14 15:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-14 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Anders Roxell Cc: ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:10 [+0200]: >arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is >lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, I'm taking this but I am renaming the subject. Lazy preempt is not required by -RT but supporting it benefits it. That means you could run arm64 without it. Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL @ 2015-05-14 15:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-14 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:10 [+0200]: >arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is >lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, I'm taking this but I am renaming the subject. Lazy preempt is not required by -RT but supporting it benefits it. That means you could run arm64 without it. Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL 2015-05-14 15:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-15 12:08 ` Anders Roxell -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-05-15 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman On 2015-05-14 17:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:10 [+0200]: > > >arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is > >lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, > > I'm taking this but I am renaming the subject. Lazy preempt is not > required by -RT but supporting it benefits it. That means you could run > arm64 without it. Thanks for picking up the patch and fixing the subject, though I was surprised to see the ownership changed. Cheers, Anders ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL @ 2015-05-15 12:08 ` Anders Roxell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Anders Roxell @ 2015-05-15 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 2015-05-14 17:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:10 [+0200]: > > >arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is > >lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, > > I'm taking this but I am renaming the subject. Lazy preempt is not > required by -RT but supporting it benefits it. That means you could run > arm64 without it. Thanks for picking up the patch and fixing the subject, though I was surprised to see the ownership changed. Cheers, Anders ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL 2015-05-15 12:08 ` Anders Roxell @ 2015-05-18 7:18 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-18 7:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Anders Roxell Cc: ayyappa.ch.linux, linux-rt-users, linux-arm-kernel, kevin.hilman On 05/15/2015 02:08 PM, Anders Roxell wrote: > On 2015-05-14 17:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:10 [+0200]: >> >>> arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is >>> lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, >> >> I'm taking this but I am renaming the subject. Lazy preempt is not >> required by -RT but supporting it benefits it. That means you could run >> arm64 without it. > > Thanks for picking up the patch and fixing the subject, > though I was surprised to see the ownership changed. Oh. The ownership ship changed only in #3 by mistake. I will fix it, sorry for that. > Cheers, > Anders Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL @ 2015-05-18 7:18 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2015-05-18 7:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 05/15/2015 02:08 PM, Anders Roxell wrote: > On 2015-05-14 17:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: >> * Anders Roxell | 2015-04-27 22:53:10 [+0200]: >> >>> arm64 is missing support for PREEMPT_RT. The main feature which is >>> lacking is support for lazy preemption. The arch-specific entry code, >> >> I'm taking this but I am renaming the subject. Lazy preempt is not >> required by -RT but supporting it benefits it. That means you could run >> arm64 without it. > > Thanks for picking up the patch and fixing the subject, > though I was surprised to see the ownership changed. Oh. The ownership ship changed only in #3 by mistake. I will fix it, sorry for that. > Cheers, > Anders Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-05-18 7:18 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-04-27 20:53 [PATCHv2 0/3] Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL on arm64 Anders Roxell 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 2015-04-27 20:53 ` [PATCHv2 1/3] arm64: Mark PMU interrupt IRQF_NO_THREAD Anders Roxell 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 2015-05-14 15:39 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2015-05-14 15:39 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2015-05-14 15:42 ` Will Deacon 2015-05-14 15:42 ` Will Deacon 2015-05-14 17:09 ` Kevin Hilman 2015-05-14 17:09 ` Kevin Hilman 2015-05-14 17:10 ` Will Deacon 2015-05-14 17:10 ` Will Deacon 2015-05-14 17:19 ` Kevin Hilman 2015-05-14 17:19 ` Kevin Hilman 2015-05-14 17:24 ` Catalin Marinas 2015-05-14 17:24 ` Catalin Marinas 2015-04-27 20:53 ` [PATCHv2 2/3] arm64: Allow forced irq threading Anders Roxell 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 2015-05-14 15:40 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2015-05-14 15:40 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2015-04-27 20:53 ` [PATCHv2 3/3] arch/arm64: Enable PREEMPT_RT_FULL Anders Roxell 2015-04-27 20:53 ` Anders Roxell 2015-05-14 15:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2015-05-14 15:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2015-05-15 12:08 ` Anders Roxell 2015-05-15 12:08 ` Anders Roxell 2015-05-18 7:18 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2015-05-18 7:18 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.