From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 1F775285CA7; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 21:38:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771018715; cv=none; b=Ujc7WPNle3zVzO78/PHwvfk58vLuxiJaYHtHnI9oVfPcNtcIoQHl939mrmPmAtdSQXiXuFfFLY0dsZb2lh8HnVvnleOwq+Ojn54oNRI5PRiPxPZWU3tS3zy8VWmaiV42iFRm5tq20/oD1S4zIDfYnJyQz5An+VCk5ULg+J4IY8s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771018715; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nDgLJgyH5fLAzAaIfpNTcwoxzuyLVGAY+RQpeOl08XE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=hyfLWCpVs5obIvJ28KgCxYq+yF/ynW9yUc0fNH5mVorAc4djBiu7giOcghrXtWsN6/waRs0X40UyGmMcsA4xkmNAtaP9Js9mLPNCUDK8X6uR4gA1zCm30I+fEBS4gfou2mzEL/d41Pk7/lv4JXJZib5mD1U0sMmrK3CY5Z38H84= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=S5A+uff/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="S5A+uff/" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B73FC116C6; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 21:38:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1771018714; bh=nDgLJgyH5fLAzAaIfpNTcwoxzuyLVGAY+RQpeOl08XE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=S5A+uff/9InguEAzYh4iOQy+LXE7MjTdiH4qG9RowisFpTuDT4oZemDGIy22o5fUQ FAz9q7QXTVtbppDw352cTue4etIpcBv7SI39fMZRkyVI2Znoj1OJrIBZxJcGaL7VY8 /pl4EQI7K64bBWoASmTJSii4AdXtNOMznmoasxAl4p/rjrFLINnh0lUeEV+8oap3N0 ROX/p48Y9CnejvxJ+dRLPXBPImXolUmDlXXpJ12c0aDzp0nS1mSJe+dp4PQ7FRQRVY vl1e4XHfmTB9Xz0rkZF3MXtgwAE8KPJqxw0bx2fOYv05XWz51N9WDySZswC4u/g0HR PfSKrO4PKGd+g== Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2026 08:38:27 +1100 From: Dave Chinner To: alexjlzheng@gmail.com Cc: cem@kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jinliang Zheng Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add cond_resched() in some place to avoid softlockup Message-ID: References: <20260205082621.2259895-1-alexjlzheng@tencent.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260205082621.2259895-1-alexjlzheng@tencent.com> On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 04:26:19PM +0800, alexjlzheng@gmail.com wrote: > From: Jinliang Zheng > > We recently observed several XFS-related softlockups in non-preempt > kernels during stability testing, and we believe adding a few > cond_resched()calls would be beneficial. > > Jinliang Zheng (2): > xfs: take a breath in xlog_ioend_work() > xfs: take a breath in xfsaild() > > fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 2 ++ > fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c | 3 +++ > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+) To follow up on my comments about cond_resched(), commit 7dadeaa6e851 ("sched: Further restrict the preemption modes") was just merged into 7.0. This means the only two supported preempt modes for all the main architectures are PREEMPT_FULL and PREEMPT_LAZY. i.e. PREEMPT_NONE and PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY are essentially gone and only remain on fringe architectures that do not support preemption or have not yet been fully ported to support preemption. Hence we should be starting to consider the removal all the cond_resched() points we have in the code, not adding more... -Dave. -- Dave Chinner dgc@kernel.org