From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S964993AbbI2NMq (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:12:46 -0400
Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:38986 "EHLO
	Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S964828AbbI2NMi (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:12:38 -0400
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:11:56 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com,
        umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 02/11] sched: Create preempt_count invariant
In-Reply-To: <20150929093519.817299442@infradead.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1509291510510.4500@nanos>
References: <20150929092825.540553633@infradead.org> <20150929093519.817299442@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0
X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: -
X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required,  ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> +	/*
> +	 * Still have preempt_count() == 2, from:
> +	 *
> +	 *	schedule()
> +	 *	  preempt_disable();			// 1
> +	 *	  __schedule()
> +	 *	    raw_spin_lock_irq(&rq->lock)	// 2
> +	 */
> +	rq = finish_task_switch(prev); /* drops rq->lock, preempt_count() == 1 */
>  	balance_callback(rq);
> -	preempt_enable();
> +	preempt_enable(); /* preempt_count() == 0 */

Bah. I so hate tail comments. What's wrong with

+	 /* preempt_count() ==> 0 */
	preempt_enable();

Hmm?

	tglx