Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757654Ab3HHH0f (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 03:26:35 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:46784 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751099Ab3HHH0d (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 03:26:33 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 00:26:23 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kent Overstreet , Uwe Kleine-K?nig Subject: Re: PREEMPT_RT vs bcache Message-ID: <20130808072623.GA3509@infradead.org> References: <1375907298.27403.35.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1375907298.27403.35.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 635 Lines: 14 On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 10:28:18PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote: > As Kent said back in 2011 (commit 84759c6d18c5), bcache needs > {down,up}_read_non_owner(). But these are not implemented by the -rt > patchset when PREEMPT_RT_FULL is enabled. Can they be added, or is > there a fundamental conflict here? How did they get back in at all? I'm pretty sure I removed them for good reason. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/