Re: Traceback with CONFIG_REGMAP_KUNIT=y+CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP=y

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On 7/20/23 08:07, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 08:03:13AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 7/20/23 07:31, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>>> They're both independently fine, but I wouldn't expect anything that's
>>> running in atomic context to be actually using dynamic allocations.
> 
>> Which one do you prefer ? As I mentioned in my second patch, there are
>> two drivers which use fast_io together with REGCACHE_RBTREE and thus
>> are likely affected by this problem. Dan's solution would cover that,
>> while my current RFC patch would likely cause those drivers to fail.
>> Plus, of course, they could get stuck if they actually end up trying to
>> sleep while allocating memory.
> 
> Like I say I don't think it's an either/or - we can do both
> independently, they both make sense standalone and don't conflict with
> each other.

I guess I am missing something. I have not tried it, but wouldn't my patches
be unnecessary if Dan's patch is applied ?

Thanks,
Guenter