> On 23 Mar 2021, at 19:26, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 23/03/2021 17:06, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>> Hi all,
>
> Hi,
>
> Please avoid top posting when answering to a comment. This makes more
> difficult to follow.
>
>> I have an update, changing the lock introduced by the serie from spin
On 23/03/2021 19:26, Julien Grall wrote:
On 23/03/2021 17:06, Luca Fancellu wrote:
Hi all,
Hi,
Please avoid top posting when answering to a comment. This makes more
difficult to follow.
I have an update, changing the lock introduced by the serie from
spinlock_t to raw_spinlock_t, cha
On 23/03/2021 17:06, Luca Fancellu wrote:
Hi all,
Hi,
Please avoid top posting when answering to a comment. This makes more
difficult to follow.
I have an update, changing the lock introduced by the serie from spinlock_t to
raw_spinlock_t, changing the lock/unlock function to use the r
Hi all,
I have an update, changing the lock introduced by the serie from spinlock_t to
raw_spinlock_t, changing the lock/unlock function to use the raw_* version and
keeping the BUG_ON(…) (now we can because raw_* implementation disable
interrupts on preempt_rt) the kernel is booting correctly.
Hi Jason,
Thanks for your hints, unfortunately seems not an init problem because in the
same init configuration I tried the 5.10.23 (preempt_rt) without the Juergen
patch but with the BUG_ON removed and it boots without problem. So seems that
applying the serie does something (on a preempt_rt k
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 3:09 PM Luca Fancellu wrote:
>
> Hi Juergen,
>
> Yes you are right it was my mistake, as you said to remove the BUG_ON(…) this
> serie
> (https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/xen-devel/cover/20210306161833.4552-1-jgr...@suse.com/)
> is needed, since I’m using yocto I’m a
Hi Juergen,
Yes you are right it was my mistake, as you said to remove the BUG_ON(…) this
serie
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/xen-devel/cover/20210306161833.4552-1-jgr...@suse.com/)
is needed, since I’m using yocto I’m able to build a preempt_rt kernel up to
the 5.10.23 and for this re
On 19.03.21 12:50, Luca Fancellu wrote:
Hi Juergen,
Could you confirm that back porting this two serie to the linux kernel 5.10:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/xen-devel/cover/20201210192536.118432...@linutronix.de/
I don't see why this one would be needed?
https://patchwork.kernel.or
Hi Juergen,
Could you confirm that back porting this two serie to the linux kernel 5.10:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/xen-devel/cover/20201210192536.118432...@linutronix.de/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/xen-devel/cover/20210306161833.4552-1-jgr...@suse.com/
Is needed to remove th
Hi Juergen,
If you are willing to do the patch I think it will be faster to being accepted,
what about the BUG_ON(…) in evtchn_2l_unmask from events_2l.c file?
Cheers,
Luca
> On 18 Mar 2021, at 07:54, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>
> On 17.03.21 15:32, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> we've been enc
On 17.03.21 15:32, Luca Fancellu wrote:
Hi all,
we've been encountering an issue when using the kernel 5.10 with
preempt_rt support for Dom0, the problem is that during the boot of
Dom0, it hits a BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled()) from the
function evtchn_fifo_unmask defined in events_fifo.c.
This
Hi all,
we've been encountering an issue when using the kernel 5.10 with preempt_rt
support for Dom0, the problem is that during the boot of Dom0, it hits a
BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled()) from the function evtchn_fifo_unmask defined in
events_fifo.c.
This is the call stack:
[ 17.817018]
12 matches
Mail list logo
