On 21/09/2023 22:55, Richard Weinberger wrote:
----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
Von: "anton ivanov" <anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com>
An: "richard" <rich...@nod.at>
CC: "linux-um" <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>, "Johannes Berg"
<johan...@sipsolutions.net>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. September 2023 23:41:16
Betreff: Re: [PATCH v4] um: Enable preemption in UML
On 21/09/2023 22:02, Richard Weinberger wrote:
----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
Von: "anton ivanov" <anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com>
An: "linux-um" <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>
CC: "Johannes Berg" <johan...@sipsolutions.net>, "richard" <rich...@nod.at>,
"anton ivanov"
<anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. September 2023 17:55:22
Betreff: [PATCH v4] um: Enable preemption in UML
From: Anton Ivanov <anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com>
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
This patch triggers here the following splat:
Ack. I will look into it tomorrow.
Thx!
I had a brief look, UML's init_IRQ() seems to return now with interrupts
enabled.
Dunno why, I need some sleep now.
Tlb. Looking at other architectures (and specifically x86) it needs
preempt_disable/enable around critical sections.
From there you may end up in the wrong state across the board.
There will be places where it will bomb out. F.E. I am chasing one is
triggered by the NFS server (it may be the same as in this trace - it
happens around the end of the initial setup).
All in all it looks better than I expected.
True that! :-)
Thanks,
//richard
_______________________________________________
linux-um mailing list
linux-um@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um
--
Anton R. Ivanov
https://www.kot-begemot.co.uk/
_______________________________________________
linux-um mailing list
linux-um@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um
