Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] riscv: support PREEMPT_DYNAMIC with static keys
From:   patchwork-bot+linux-riscv@kernel.org
Message-Id: <169340163480.19859.2206176253038715452.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 30 Aug 2023 13:20:34 +0000
References: <20230716164925.1858-1-jszhang@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230716164925.1858-1-jszhang@kernel.org>
To:     Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
        palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, arnd@arndb.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hello:

This patch was applied to riscv/linux.git (for-next)
by Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>:

On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 00:49:25 +0800 you wrote:
> Currently, each architecture can support PREEMPT_DYNAMIC through
> either static calls or static keys. To support PREEMPT_DYNAMIC on
> riscv, we face three choices:
> 
> 1. only add static calls support to riscv
> As Mark pointed out in commit 99cf983cc8bc ("sched/preempt: Add
> PREEMPT_DYNAMIC using static keys"), static keys "...should have
> slightly lower overhead than non-inline static calls, as this
> effectively inlines each trampoline into the start of its callee. This
> may avoid redundant work, and may integrate better with CFI schemes."
> So even we add static calls(without inline static calls) to riscv,
> static keys is still a better choice.
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [v2] riscv: support PREEMPT_DYNAMIC with static keys
    https://git.kernel.org/riscv/c/15e062726f55

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html