Re: [PATCH iwl-net 0/3] idpf: virtchnl locking and async fixes

Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-17T14:38:54Z

On 2026-03-17 07:20:18 [-0700], Tantilov, Emil S wrote:
> > Why is there a raw_spinlock_t? From a quick look a spinlock_t would do
> > just fine with not runtime change for !PREEMPT_RT.
>
> The handling of the virtchannel messages is done via the completion API
> and the transactions are using the raw spinlock from struct
> swait_queue_head:
>
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.19.8/source/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_virtchnl.c#L298
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tnguy/net-queue.git/tree/include/linux/swait.h?h=dev-queue#n44

I am aware that completions use a raw_spinlock_t. I don't see the link.
What would break if you make that lock a spinlock_t?

> Thanks,
> Emil

Sebastian