From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5C55C4361B for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 15:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9115F23731 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 15:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727154AbgLGPjv (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:39:51 -0500 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:37294 "EHLO galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725774AbgLGPjv (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:39:51 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 16:39:08 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1607355549; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=cKwN9+29kWGZaYiMYoA21N7+6UWBWHBuDsf/R9WFbGE=; b=axgZm7m2FoJ3QBxVBh9BzBvSXQcai48EnwaXhifRGEOPC/WXEU3ZPDU0o67zJw8sdlGlOa g8ANFMZCI1TPpAI37pkWD6JVORP+D4nz1OVZrns9UjlcivE4fOqJcj9CWWzLafPxpuOhR1 DbPYQD/VEaILJM8vom7Cm3CeGDRaiCqt1nSXssLo4gQCg6oaaw7DOEJOXPkr0Ayj5v4fP/ xeL25pZB7Xiw/zAt5YpygtKTwsj6HHi7t/rBss9dpGmBMC/Q8zpi0+n4MjxOH+wCkfTRj9 W38zrRn7ycdMmQj4kbevsOMJqukwoGk9rCWlOm5KfaBWaCKcf76vAn4optSvtA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1607355549; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=cKwN9+29kWGZaYiMYoA21N7+6UWBWHBuDsf/R9WFbGE=; b=VSBDhjEOA8gLFqfdew+9aCk9yoJdTZpDhHIZlB9TWEzD/Bo6UkL6gG1Nk8sSskUT8NFxX+ fBlVwdxph8qmytCQ== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Peter Zijlstra , LKML , Frederic Weisbecker , Paul McKenney Subject: Re: [patch V2 9/9] tasklets: Prevent kill/unlock_wait deadlock on RT Message-ID: <20201207153908.5orqlhp3v5xoat63@linutronix.de> References: <20201204170151.960336698@linutronix.de> <20201204170805.627618080@linutronix.de> <20201207114743.GK3040@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20201207140040.yrxsu4v4xz43szkk@linutronix.de> <87tusx63q8.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tusx63q8.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-12-07 16:22:07 [+0100], Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, Dec 07 2020 at 15:00, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > So we keep the RT part as-is and replace the non-RT bits with this? > > No. It would work for both. So instead of boosting our way through we simply wait until the tasklet completes. Given that canceling is usually done on start/stop events, it shouldn't matter if the RT priority is lost. Sebastian