Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757986AbcDHIcJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 04:32:09 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:50323 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757142AbcDHIcH (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 04:32:07 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 10:31:58 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: xlpang@redhat.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Juri Lelli , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched/rtmutex/deadline: Fix a PI crash for deadline tasks Message-ID: <20160408083158.GV3430@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1459947556-12332-1-git-send-email-xlpang@redhat.com> <20160406181433.GT3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <570765F7.7070406@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <570765F7.7070406@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 656 Lines: 16 On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 04:04:07PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote: > On 2016/04/07 at 02:14, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > I would suggest doing the rt_mutex_postunlock() thing as a separate > > patch, it has some merit outside of these changes and reduces the total > > amount of complexity in this patch. > > I think the code change is necessary , as it avoids the invalid task_struct > access issue introduced by PATCH1. > > Do you mean just making the code refactor using rt_mutex_postunlock() > as a separate patch? or do I miss something? This, a separate patch that comes before this one. But no need to send that until you've received word from Thomas.