Wang Qing <wangq...@vivo.com> writes: > PREEMPT_RT is a separate preemption model, CONFIG_PREEMPT will > be disabled when CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT is enabled, so we need > to add CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT output to __die(). > > Signed-off-by: Wang Qing <wangq...@vivo.com>
Something fairly similar was posted previously. That time I said: I don't think there's any point adding the "_RT" to the __die() output until/if we ever start supporting PREEMPT_RT. https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/87d0ext4q3....@mpe.ellerman.id.au/ And I think I still feel the same way. It's not clear powerpc will ever support PREEMPT_RT, so this would just be confusing to people. And potentially someone will then send a patch to remove it as dead code. cheers > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c > index 5006dcb..dec7b81 > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c > @@ -262,10 +262,11 @@ static int __die(const char *str, struct pt_regs *regs, > long err) > { > printk("Oops: %s, sig: %ld [#%d]\n", str, err, ++die_counter); > > - printk("%s PAGE_SIZE=%luK%s%s%s%s%s%s %s\n", > + printk("%s PAGE_SIZE=%luK%s%s%s%s%s%s%s %s\n", > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ? "LE" : "BE", > PAGE_SIZE / 1024, get_mmu_str(), > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT) ? " PREEMPT" : "", > + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) ? " PREEMPT_RT" : "", > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP) ? " SMP" : "", > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP) ? (" NR_CPUS=" __stringify(NR_CPUS)) : "", > debug_pagealloc_enabled() ? " DEBUG_PAGEALLOC" : "", > -- > 2.7.4
