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:   Wed, 4 Aug 2021 12:47:55 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] v5.14-rc4-rt4
Message-ID: <20210804124755.21ca7e3d@oasis.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20210804163119.t4c7bkpdk33byxtx@linutronix.de>
References: <20210804131731.GG8057@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
        <4f549344-1040-c677-6a6a-53e243c5f364@kernel.dk>
        <feebf183-2e33-36b5-4538-62a40b2a58b6@kernel.dk>
        <20210804153308.oasahcxjmcw7vivo@linutronix.de>
        <f2d0a028-fe85-28ff-9cea-8ab1d26a15d0@kernel.dk>
        <20210804154743.niogqvnladdkfgi2@linutronix.de>
        <7c946918-ae0d-6195-6a78-b019f9bc1fd3@kernel.dk>
        <20210804121704.1587c41b@oasis.local.home>
        <20210804162231.rfj5i736lqc4nsio@linutronix.de>
        <20210804122541.741cf858@oasis.local.home>
        <20210804163119.t4c7bkpdk33byxtx@linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 18:31:19 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:

> CPU-local wake-ups just set NEED_RESCHED and wait for preempt_enable()
> to do the magic. Just because the code not perform wake_up() now does
> not mean it will not do so in the future. Also it is here as an example
> which might be copied somewhere else.

Does this mean all local_irq_disable/enable() is audited? What do you do for;

	local_irq_disable();
	[..]
	wakeup_process(x); /* on local CPU */
	[..]
	local_irq_enable();

And if local_irq_disable() is not used anymore, or seldom, what harm
would it be to add a preemption check to that caller? And change
local_irq_enable() that is used internally by other atom functions be
called __local_irq_enable()?

Not to mention that we could just open code that too:

	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)) {
		local_irq_enable();
		preempt_check_resched();
	}

And make it ugly enough that nobody will want to copy it :-)

-- Steve