From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1162662AbeBPSCl (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:02:41 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:47548 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1162511AbeBPSCk (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:02:40 -0500 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1DA0221775 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=rostedt@goodmis.org Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:02:37 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernel/sofirq: consolidate common code in __tasklet_schedule() + _hi_ Message-ID: <20180216130237.2a955563@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20180216175508.vezb3ll32dxvlz4z@linutronix.de> References: <20180215172042.31573-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20180215172042.31573-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20180215150707.49cc2332@gandalf.local.home> <20180216085302.ptzq5yspmdq3zlh6@linutronix.de> <20180216123109.5098b1ca@gandalf.local.home> <20180216175508.vezb3ll32dxvlz4z@linutronix.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 18:55:09 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > Should we add something like: > > > > WARN_ON_ONCE(!in_atomic()); > > > > ? > > Doubt it. this_cpu_ptr() screams already with CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT. If that's the case then, yeah I agree. I couldn't remember if this_cpu_ptr() did that or not. I remember having an argument with Christoph Lameter about whether or not this_cpu_* functions would complain with preemption off, as some of the use cases were for being used with preemption enabled. I remember there was some kind of compromise but didn't remember exactly what that was. -- Steve