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:   Fri, 9 Jul 2021 10:33:18 +0200
From:   Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, bristot@redhat.com, bsegall@google.com,
        mgorman@suse.de, Mark Simmons <msimmons@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Fix double enqueue caused by rt_effective_prio
Message-ID: <YOgJzqOrVHUvCpch@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20210701091431.256457-1-juri.lelli@redhat.com>
 <YObOIwH7MbfagklQ@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YObS2Rudg4osS7Ic@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YObS2Rudg4osS7Ic@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Peter,

On 08/07/21 12:26, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 12:06:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Slightly larger patch, but perhaps a little cleaner.. still pondering if
> > we can share a little more between __sched_setscheduler() and
> > rt_mutex_setprio().
> 
> Best I can seem to come up with...

Thanks for the non-lazy version of the fix!

Makes sense to me and it looks good from quick testing. I'll be doing
more extensive testing and ask Mark (cc-ed) to help with that. :)

We'll report back soon-ish.

Best,
Juri