1 files changed, 0 insertions, 47 deletions
diff --git a/debian/patches-rt/0001-signal-Add-proper-comment-about-the-preempt-disable-.patch b/debian/patches-rt/0001-signal-Add-proper-comment-about-the-preempt-disable-.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index e00261d79..000000000
--- a/debian/patches-rt/0001-signal-Add-proper-comment-about-the-preempt-disable-.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,47 +0,0 @@
-From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
-Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2023 12:09:31 +0200
-Subject: [PATCH 1/2] signal: Add proper comment about the preempt-disable in
- ptrace_stop().
-Origin: https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/6.6/older/patches-6.6.7-rt18.tar.xz
-
-Commit 53da1d9456fe7 ("fix ptrace slowness") added a preempt-disable section
-between read_unlock() and the following schedule() invocation without
-explaining why it is needed.
-
-Replace the comment with an explanation why this is needed. Clarify that
-it is needed for correctness but for performance reasons.
-
-Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
-Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
-Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230803100932.325870-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de
----
- kernel/signal.c |   17 ++++++++++++++---
- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
-
---- a/kernel/signal.c
-+++ b/kernel/signal.c
-@@ -2329,10 +2329,21 @@ static int ptrace_stop(int exit_code, in
- 		do_notify_parent_cldstop(current, false, why);
- 
- 	/*
--	 * Don't want to allow preemption here, because
--	 * sys_ptrace() needs this task to be inactive.
-+	 * The previous do_notify_parent_cldstop() invocation woke ptracer.
-+	 * One a PREEMPTION kernel this can result in preemption requirement
-+	 * which will be fulfilled after read_unlock() and the ptracer will be
-+	 * put on the CPU.
-+	 * The ptracer is in wait_task_inactive(, __TASK_TRACED) waiting for
-+	 * this task wait in schedule(). If this task gets preempted then it
-+	 * remains enqueued on the runqueue. The ptracer will observe this and
-+	 * then sleep for a delay of one HZ tick. In the meantime this task
-+	 * gets scheduled, enters schedule() and will wait for the ptracer.
- 	 *
--	 * XXX: implement read_unlock_no_resched().
-+	 * This preemption point is not bad from correctness point of view but
-+	 * extends the runtime by one HZ tick time due to the ptracer's sleep.
-+	 * The preempt-disable section ensures that there will be no preemption
-+	 * between unlock and schedule() and so improving the performance since
-+	 * the ptracer has no reason to sleep.
- 	 */
- 	preempt_disable();
- 	read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);