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, 30 Jul 2021 16:44:27 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     "Zhang, Qiang" <Qiang.Zhang@windriver.com>
Cc:     "linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: Question on (locking: Make spinlock_t and rwlock_t a RCU section
 on RT)
Message-ID: <20210730144427.357annugmfjap24e@linutronix.de>
References: <BL1PR11MB5478DB9FA9C2BEF56FBFF6AAFFE89@BL1PR11MB5478.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BL1PR11MB5478DB9FA9C2BEF56FBFF6AAFFE89@BL1PR11MB5478.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-07-26 07:43:33 [+0000], Zhang, Qiang wrote:
> Operation of sleep is not allowed in RCU read critical area,  If
> after acquiring a rt-spinlock , try to acquire another one
> rt-spinlock,  This may cause sleep, and trigger RCU warning.  
> 
> Is there a problem with my analysis or something I missed?

This warning is suppressed on RT. Same as on CONFIG_PREEMPT when a task
gets preempted while in a rcu_read_lock() section.

> Thanks
> Qiang

Sebastian