From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 4/6] rt/locking: Reenable migration accross schedule Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:55:32 +0200 Message-ID: <1461002132.3895.59.camel@gmail.com> References: <1459405903.14336.64.camel@gmail.com> <20160401211105.GE29603@linutronix.de> <1459566735.3779.36.camel@gmail.com> <57068F28.8010409@linutronix.de> <1460123044.16946.11.camel@gmail.com> <5707B911.6090404@linutronix.de> <1460125010.16946.27.camel@gmail.com> <5707C563.2050801@linutronix.de> <1460134168.3860.6.camel@gmail.com> <20160418171550.GA21734@linutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Thomas Gleixner , linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt , Peter Zijlstra To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160418171550.GA21734@linutronix.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 19:15 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > take 2. There is this else case in pin_current_cpu() where I take > hp_lock. I didn't manage to get in there. So I *think* we can get rid of > the lock now. Since there is no lock (or will be) we can drop the whole > `do_mig_dis' checking and do the migrate_disable() _after_ we obtained > the lock. We were not able to do so due to the lock hp_lock. > > And with this, I didn't manage to triger the lockup you had with > futextest. I'll have to feed it to DL980, hotplug and jitter test it. It seemed to think that pinning post acquisition was a bad idea jitter wise, but I was bending things up while juggling multiple boxen, so.. -Mike