Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] preempt: PREEMPT vs PREEMPT_DYNAMIC configs fixup

[Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>]

On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 06:51:59PM +0000, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> This v3 is mostly about the naming problem - get your paintbrushes ready!
> 
> Patches
> =======
> 
> o Patch 1 is the meat of the topic - note that it's now in tip/sched/urgent
> o Patch 2 introduces helpers for the dynamic preempt state
> o Patches 3-4 make use of said accessors where relevant.
> 
> Testing
> =======
> 
> Briefly tested the dynamic part on an x86 kernel + QEMU.
> Compile-tested the kcsan test thingie as a module.
> 
> Revisions
> =========
> 
> v1: http://lore.kernel.org/r/20211105104035.3112162-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com
> v1.5: http://lore.kernel.org/r/20211109151057.3489223-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com
> 
> v2 -> v3
> ++++++++
> 
> o Turned is_preempt_*() into preempt_model_*() (Frederic)
>   It breaks my rule of "booleans must answer a yes/no question" but is the best
>   I could come with using a "preempt_" prefix
>   
> o Added preempt_model_preemptible() (Marco)
>   Now used in kcsan_test.c
>   
> o Dropped powerpc changes
> 
> Cheers,
> Valentin
> 
> 
> Valentin Schneider (4):
>   preempt: Restore preemption model selection configs

Seems like this one has been applied from the previous series.

>   preempt/dynamic: Introduce preemption model accessors
>   kcsan: Use preemption model accessors
>   ftrace: Use preemption model accessors for trace header printout

So for the rest:

Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>

Thanks!