NAK: ACK/Cmnt: [SRU][J, F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 0/1] Stop allowing RCU_SOFTIRQ in idle

[Tim Gardner]

On 12/8/22 12:40 PM, Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 12/7/22 2:29 PM, Bodong Wang wrote:
>> RCU_SOFTIRQ used to be special in that it could be raised on purpose
>> within the idle path to prevent from stopping the tick. Some code still
>> prevents from unnecessary warnings related to this specific behaviour
>> while entering in dynticks-idle mode.
>>
>> However the nohz layout has changed quite a bit in ten years, and the
>> removal of CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ has been the final straw to this
>> safe-conduct. Now the RCU_SOFTIRQ vector is expected to be raised from
>> sane places.
>>
>> This patch is applicable for both J and F.
>>
>> Frederic Weisbecker (1):
>>    tick/rcu: Stop allowing RCU_SOFTIRQ in idle
>>
>>   include/linux/interrupt.h |  8 ++++++-
>>   kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>   2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
> Acked-by: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com>
> 
> I'll assume that '[SRU][F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 1/1]' applies to Jammy 
> as well, as is implied by '[SRU][J, F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 0/1]' ?
> 

Never mind, I see that the Jammy patch is outside this email tread. 
Please resubmit while making sure both patches are in the same thread. 
Otherwise managing patch states becomes quite tedious.

-- 
-----------
Tim Gardner
Canonical, Inc