29 Mar
2023
29 Mar
'23
7:50 p.m.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 06:23:24PM +0200, Benjamin Bara wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 16:54, Wolfram Sang wsa@kernel.org wrote:
For the !CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT case, preemptible() is defined 0. So, don't we lose the irqs_disabled() check in that case?
Thanks for the feedback! PREEMPT_COUNT is selected by PREEMPTION, so I guess in the case of !PREEMPT_COUNT, we should be atomic (anyways)?
Could you make sure please? Asking Peter Zijlstra might be a good idea. He helped me with the current implementation.