On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 11:38:44AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2025-03-28 21:29:16 [+0100], Ben Hutchings wrote: > > The problem described here is specific to v5.10-rt. > … > > Thank you for the report. > > Luis is aware of it and handling it > https://lore.kernel.org/all/Z9yuIpi8zjrTCkoB@xxxxxxxx/ Thank you for the report and patch Ben! As Sebastian mentioned, I was working on that and looking for input from the other RT maintainers on whether to fix that case with a small patch or backport the lock primitive definitions from, say, v5.15-rt and remove the two patches we have in place for similar problems. As, so far, the usage of similar statements has been rare in the code, a small patch sounded like a good compromise. If another update brings a similar statement (void function returning <spin_lock macro>), I will backport newer locking primitives (that use functions instead of macros). Best regards, Luis > > Sebastian > ---end quoted text---
