From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT] Align rt_mutex inlining with upstream behavior
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 18:52:42 +0100
Message-ID: <20170211175241.GA30998@gmail.com>
References: <1485312350-1265-1-git-send-email-agoins@nvidia.com>
 <20170126170109.6zhoohgodtvxot54@linutronix.de>
 <20170130173534.GA24966@prokofiev.nvidia.com>
 <20170203155434.utptndmoskcyimn7@linutronix.de>
 <20170203164924.GB19814@prokofiev.nvidia.com>
 <20170210175049.3cvrk5ki7c6uiblg@linutronix.de>
 <20170210180929.GC9583@prokofiev.nvidia.com>
 <20170210182807.6gzs3xn3ga727xsb@linutronix.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Andy Ritger <aritger@nvidia.com>, Alex Goins <agoins@nvidia.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Return-path: <linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com ([209.85.128.194]:36372 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750779AbdBKRwq (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sat, 11 Feb 2017 12:52:46 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170210182807.6gzs3xn3ga727xsb@linutronix.de>
Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org>


* Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:

> On 2017-02-10 10:09:29 [-0800], Andy Ritger wrote:
> > Is the
> > 
> >     WARN_ON(rt_mutex_is_locked(lock));
> > 
> > in rt_mutex_destroy() valuable in non-CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES kernels,
> > such that it would be better to always call it, and not noop away mutex_destroy()
> > non-CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES kernels?  I thought that was your objection to
> > Alex's original patch.
> 
> It kind of was…
> So first I removed the GPL symbol. Then I wasn't too happy about it
> especially since it was not introduced as part of RT. So I reverted that
> changed and aligned with mainline behaviour (the mutex_rt.h hunk). But
> then I noticed that with CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES=n and
> CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES=y we still have a regression compared to !RT and
> this was the initial motivation to fix things.
> Then I got curious why mutex_lock() (which is essential rt_mutex_lock())
> works and noticed the wrapper around it. And while looking at it I
> decided to go back to strip the GPL part from export symbol instead of
> adding a wrapper. And here I am.
> Then I was looking at the patch and decided to align with mainline (and
> keep that one hunk) in case Ingo ask for his GPL symbol.

tglx and Peter Zijlstra are main co-authors of kernel/locking/rtmutex.c, and every 
author (copyright holder) has to agree to changing a GPL export of a kernel 
subsystem's API to a non-GPL export.

Thanks,

	Ingo