Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:39:18 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sam Nobs <samuel.nobs@taitradio.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: imx: drop workaround for forced irq threading
Message-ID: <20210322113918.ze52gq54cpsspgej@linutronix.de>
References: <20210322111036.31966-1-johan@kernel.org>
 <20210322113402.naqzgkoe2xesnw4b@pengutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <20210322113402.naqzgkoe2xesnw4b@pengutronix.de>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-03-22 12:34:02 [+0100], Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 12:10:36PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Force-threaded interrupt handlers used to run with interrupts enabled,
> > something which could lead to deadlocks in case a threaded handler
> > shared a lock with code running in hard interrupt context (e.g. timer
> > callbacks) and did not explicitly disable interrupts.
> >=20
> > This was specifically the case for serial drivers that take the port
> > lock in their console write path as printk can be called from hard
> > interrupt context also with forced threading ("threadirqs").
> >=20
> > Since commit 81e2073c175b ("genirq: Disable interrupts for force
> > threaded handlers") interrupt handlers always run with interrupts
> > disabled on non-RT so that drivers no longer need to do handle this.
>=20
> So we're breaking RT knowingly here? If this is the case I'm not happy
> with your change. (And if RT is not affected a different wording would
> be good.)

Which wording, could you be more specific? It looks good from here and
no, RT is not affected.

> Best regards
> Uwe

Sebastian