From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDCB72BE7A3 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 11:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754910467; cv=none; b=YmCjAXWe66nNbw9tzi4G+QRA8b08JpIJo5WGDtZ0mS7AVTLsTlxANac1BzS66x7Dp8uk5MuLU0ilBiA3vvcVF+RvgruHRIEh/NSrDKU3QZftFtrsOkuMiLLpTHBmijLDKnaMUKgT01Tw7Lnos+QNpl7rJKAaMkxI7ZrCWSk4aho= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754910467; c=relaxed/simple; bh=O2SKs0Md1F3DfmxaC8UtIvZcyp1gvc16RhrpwvtZfu0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=IAIJadGZvhFgE/EWv19AemCT41VlTWTNe3ll+rRQ4iwclh+OXsjRo3Q5OolBbHL9ivyuYFpsz3/RULx4woeu6jTgpoUh0OWrzIRusmfGJ2pBw6Bnvq/rs0qviMFGMpvfFKRBLvEKqXOUIniZNCxIrY8iRtLkWEap/Wt5wHCD0Lw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=GqtAQaCh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="GqtAQaCh" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1754910463; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=O2SKs0Md1F3DfmxaC8UtIvZcyp1gvc16RhrpwvtZfu0=; b=GqtAQaChLiYi0LlLLPXpkNKdCIwm3zE5khHt6BCgk1Xjq67BenT7BpyXjtB7ziGYGdJJXq dRxgSkpzMrpt1GNmYK+buFUwb4xj6fBmmlXdMWP3Ja+uaIiz7EwnjPdHyHO+/xh5QO4Ajx tZ2Yo5o1D9bOGdDi1gWI8IBlYqmwwLg= Received: from mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-101-clhStL0ZPX67YSPKFCKKIw-1; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 07:07:42 -0400 X-MC-Unique: clhStL0ZPX67YSPKFCKKIw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: clhStL0ZPX67YSPKFCKKIw_1754910460 Received: from mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.93]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA84F1956088; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 11:07:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.45.225.234]) by mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 21D0B18004A3; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 11:07:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 13:06:27 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 13:06:18 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" , Peter Zijlstra , Clark Williams , Steven Rostedt , Tejun Heo , David Vernet , Barret Rhoden , Josh Don , Crystal Wood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, Juri Lelli , Ben Segall , Dietmar Eggemann , Ingo Molnar , Mel Gorman , Valentin Schneider , Vincent Guittot , Thomas Gleixner , Wander Lairson Costa Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] sched: do not call __put_task_struct() on rt if pi_blocked_on is set Message-ID: <20250811110617.GB5250@redhat.com> References: <20250728201441.GA4690@redhat.com> <20250729114702.GA18541@redhat.com> <20250729130936.GB18541@redhat.com> <20250801102428.GB27835@redhat.com> <20250811105948.OafBprND@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250811105948.OafBprND@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.93 On 08/11, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 2025-08-01 12:24:29 [+0200], Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > s/LD_WAIT_SLEEP/LD_WAIT_CONFIG/ needs another discussion even if I am right, > > sorry for the confusion. > > You are correct Oleg. I've been just verifying it and yes: LD_WAIT_SLEEP > suppresses also mutex while the intention is to only suppress > spinlock_t. Good, thanks. > We have four users in tree, based on quick check all four should use > CONFIG, three of them do use SLEEP. Yes. I'll send the simple patch when this patch from Luis is merged. Oleg