Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:39:06 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/34] csky: Use CONFIG_PREEMPTION
Message-ID: <20191016073905.yv4xqoovrdrnrbp7@linutronix.de>
References: <20191015191821.11479-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
 <20191015191821.11479-7-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
 <CAJF2gTSVxgc5kw22dfotoHF91HxyTKC4ETYLTskEfyn3rf=kCw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJF2gTSVxgc5kw22dfotoHF91HxyTKC4ETYLTskEfyn3rf=kCw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-10-16 07:29:34 [+0800], Guo Ren wrote:
> Could CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT be supported in csky ? Any arch backend porting ?

It could. HIGH_RES_TIMERS is useful and IRQ_FORCED_THREADING is
required. You already have PREEMPT(ION) which is good. Then you would
have to try and my guess would be that some of spinlock_t vs
raw_spinlock_t could require changes but we should have lockdep support
for that which would make things easier.

Sebastian