Re: [PATCH] rqspinlock: Fix order in raw_res_spin_(un)lock_irq to allow schedule

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tue, Jun 9, 2026, at 15:04, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> On Tue, 2026-06-09 at 13:22 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> Should this be Cc:stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to get backported?
>
> Not sure if the Fixes: is enough to trigger the automation, I rarely
> remember to Cc:stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and they're usually picked.

There is always human interaction. If you just have 'Fixes',
this means someone will have to look at the patch carefully
and make a decision, since a lot of bugfix patches either don't
apply to old kernels or don't fall under the rules for stable
backports.

If the patch gets tagged Cc:, this means it is expected to be
backported and needs less manual work.

> In case I guess I'd need to re-submit the patch right?

It can be added by whoever picks up the patch.

>> Did you see this cause measurable performance problems,
>> or did you find it through inspection?
>
> I noticed it while debugging an ENOMEM issue in the test_maps BPF
> selftest on PREEMPT_RT and this was an obvious cuplrit (irq_work not
> scheduled during a stress run). Turns out the problem is still there
> after this fix though.

Ok

       Arnd