On 2025-03-20 21:09:06 [-0300], Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote:
> Sebastian, Steven, All,
>
> Should I apply this solution in a RT update right after I release
> v5.10.235-rt128 or should I backport the definition of rt locking
> primitives from a newer PREEMPT_RT patch (say v5.15-rt or v6.1-rt)?
The statement ("return spin_unlock.*") is not very common, there is just
one "user" even in later kernels.
Backporting the definition (instead of changing the driver) would be
more consistent with later trees. I'm somewhere between the definition
backport and what is less work.
The v5.4 should be also affected, right?
Sebastian
