On 10/02/2022 15:10, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 2022-02-10 15:05:24 [+0100], Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 10/02/2022 14:47, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 2022-02-10 09:33:56 [+0100], Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
The PREEMPT_RT patchset does not use soft IRQs thus trying to filter for do_softirq fails for such kernel:
PREEMPT_RT does use soft IRQs.
Correct. It does not use do_softirq() code, but follows different path with ksoftirqd. Shall I rephrase it towards something like this? Or maybe you have some more accurate description?
It would be good to describe what the purpose of the change in terms of the actual problem and the aimed solution.
The purpose was explain - fix a failing test with PREEMPT_RT. I am not planning to rework entire test, it is merely a fix.
The implementation detail is that do_softirq() is in ifndef.
So let me ask again. We have FUNC1="schedule" FUNC2="do_softirq"
What is the purpose of this? Do you need FUNC2 when ksoftirqd is run or when softirqs are served? Not sure how scheduler_tick fits in all this.
I guess this is more a question to the author of the test. Unless you are now questioning the entire purpose of this test?
Best regards, Krzysztof