From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752095AbcGNRUY (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2016 13:20:24 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:45546 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751606AbcGNRTt (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2016 13:19:49 -0400 Subject: Re: [RT PATCH 2/2] timers: wakeup all timer waiters without holding the base lock To: Steven Rostedt References: <1468512304-15310-1-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <1468512304-15310-2-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20160714120917.038b215b@gandalf.local.home> Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Message-ID: Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 19:19:47 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160714120917.038b215b@gandalf.local.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/14/2016 06:09 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:05:04 +0200 > Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >> There should be no need to hold the base lock during the wakeup. There >> should be no boosting involved, the wakeup list has its own lock so it >> should be safe to do this without the lock. >> >> Cc: stable-rt@vger.kernel.org > > Nothing against this patch, but as you marked it for stable, can you > add to the change log what issue you had that caused you to make this > change? #1 was noticed while looking at the code, it *might* happen. #2 Is not strictly required for back porting. I just don't see a reason for holding the lock, that is all. > -- Steve Sebastian