From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD2CC43441 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 11:23:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02F8921479 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 11:23:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="ceitY1ni" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 02F8921479 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726936AbeJJSov (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:44:51 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:36058 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726468AbeJJSov (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:44:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=8VP2OhUAIfWoaz7iej4cE+Z1YVIvqGEQQNjTdH96U64=; b=ceitY1niyTtuxoVE7X5TJEfeN SGNx1xQkTTvGpX1U8zAEYU/u5RDV/DMHbTNphsLUiArCFGMIAj/EMImIWSU28uqJJ1nYyWCGp6tzk 0kMpwyZhknNJDr1Spj6+ob6XUVQ91WGBra1e9xs/3wZkkszMWKcbD3v/o8FWy4C2cdWzXVUdG4jRS 2UUSC8WFl5yud/cDnD5x7D2ZWPlqwNxp68SOEs+8f79zGToL1JRVT+4MuGhnov0ViehRWphiiUm/D srXtdsUOm86E/L/5x9eJq5bTy9/M1uhkSWIg1p306GJN7OjAKGKgvLH0cYRnOJoAZv6LNe6oYtTnf jlKoK8Gfw==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gACZy-0004eJ-TI; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 11:23:03 +0000 Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CA7D2202A40A9; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 13:23:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 13:23:00 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: luca abeni Cc: Juri Lelli , mingo@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, claudio@evidence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it, alessio.balsini@gmail.com, bristot@redhat.com, will.deacon@arm.com, andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, patrick.bellasi@arm.com, henrik@austad.us, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFD/RFC PATCH 0/8] Towards implementing proxy execution Message-ID: <20181010112300.GQ5728@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20181009092434.26221-1-juri.lelli@redhat.com> <20181010123417.26c682ef@luca64> <20181010105710.GP5728@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20181010131629.6623ddb4@luca64> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181010131629.6623ddb4@luca64> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 01:16:29PM +0200, luca abeni wrote: > On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 12:57:10 +0200 > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 12:34:17PM +0200, luca abeni wrote: > > > So, I would propose to make the proxy() function of patch more > > > generic, and not strictly bound to mutexes. Maybe a task structure > > > can contain a list of tasks for which the task can act as a proxy, > > > and we can have a function like "I want to act as a proxy for task > > > T" to be invoked when a task blocks? > > > > Certainly possible, but that's something I'd prefer to look at after > > it all 'works'. > > Of course :) > I was mentioning this idea because maybe it can have some impact on the > design. > > BTW, here is another "interesting" issue I had in the past with changes > like this one: how do we check if the patchset works as expected? > > "No crashes" is surely a requirement, but I think we also need some > kind of testcase that fails if the inheritance mechanism is not working > properly, and is successful if the inheritance works. > > Maybe we can develop some testcase based on rt-app (if noone has such a > testcase already) Indeed; IIRC there is a test suite that mostly covers the FIFO-PI stuff, that should obviously still pass. Steve, do you know where that lives? For the extended DL stuff, we'd need new tests.