* [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation. @ 2009-03-06 13:27 Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2009-03-06 13:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] Doc: Fix wrong API example usage of call_rcu() Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2009-03-07 5:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation Paul E. McKenney 0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer @ 2009-03-06 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Miller; +Cc: netdev, paulmck Trivial fix while reading through the RCU docs. Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk> --- Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt b/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt index 95821a2..7aa2002 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt +++ b/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ o I hear that RCU needs work in order to support realtime kernels? This work is largely completed. Realtime-friendly RCU can be enabled via the CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU kernel configuration parameter. However, work is in progress for enabling priority boosting of - preempted RCU read-side critical sections.This is needed if you + preempted RCU read-side critical sections. This is needed if you have CPU-bound realtime threads. o Where can I find more information on RCU? ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] Doc: Fix wrong API example usage of call_rcu(). 2009-03-06 13:27 [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation Jesper Dangaard Brouer @ 2009-03-06 13:27 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2009-03-07 5:49 ` Paul E. McKenney 2009-03-07 5:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation Paul E. McKenney 1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer @ 2009-03-06 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Miller; +Cc: netdev, paulmck At some point the API of call_rcu() changed from three parameters to two parameters, correct the documentation. One confusing thing in RCU/listRCU.txt, which is NOT fixed in this patch, is that no reason or explaination is given for using call_rcu() instead of the normal synchronize_rcu() call. Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk> --- Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt | 6 +++--- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt index 1fd1753..4349c14 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt +++ b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ Following are the RCU equivalents for these two functions: list_for_each_entry(e, list, list) { if (!audit_compare_rule(rule, &e->rule)) { list_del_rcu(&e->list); - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); return 0; } } @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ RCU ("read-copy update") its name. The RCU code is as follows: ne->rule.action = newaction; ne->rule.file_count = newfield_count; list_replace_rcu(e, ne); - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); return 0; } } @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ flag under the spinlock as follows: list_del_rcu(&e->list); e->deleted = 1; spin_unlock(&e->lock); - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); return 0; } } ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] Doc: Fix wrong API example usage of call_rcu(). 2009-03-06 13:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] Doc: Fix wrong API example usage of call_rcu() Jesper Dangaard Brouer @ 2009-03-07 5:49 ` Paul E. McKenney 2009-03-09 0:53 ` Paul E. McKenney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2009-03-07 5:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer; +Cc: David Miller, netdev On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 02:27:38PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > At some point the API of call_rcu() changed from three parameters > to two parameters, correct the documentation. > > One confusing thing in RCU/listRCU.txt, which is NOT fixed in this patch, > is that no reason or explaination is given for using call_rcu() instead of > the normal synchronize_rcu() call. Good catch!!! Indeed, call_rcu() did take three arguments at one time, like back in 2.5 days... On the use of call_rcu() vs. synchronize_rcu(), the two possible reasons called out in question 8 in Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt are: 1. Update performance is important. 2. Updaters cannot block. I would welcome a patch to this file discussing this. Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk> > --- > > Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt | 6 +++--- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt > index 1fd1753..4349c14 100644 > --- a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt > +++ b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ Following are the RCU equivalents for these two functions: > list_for_each_entry(e, list, list) { > if (!audit_compare_rule(rule, &e->rule)) { > list_del_rcu(&e->list); > - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); > + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); > return 0; > } > } > @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ RCU ("read-copy update") its name. The RCU code is as follows: > ne->rule.action = newaction; > ne->rule.file_count = newfield_count; > list_replace_rcu(e, ne); > - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); > + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); > return 0; > } > } > @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ flag under the spinlock as follows: > list_del_rcu(&e->list); > e->deleted = 1; > spin_unlock(&e->lock); > - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); > + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); > return 0; > } > } > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] Doc: Fix wrong API example usage of call_rcu(). 2009-03-07 5:49 ` Paul E. McKenney @ 2009-03-09 0:53 ` Paul E. McKenney 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2009-03-09 0:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer; +Cc: David Miller, netdev On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 09:49:59PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 02:27:38PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > At some point the API of call_rcu() changed from three parameters > > to two parameters, correct the documentation. > > > > One confusing thing in RCU/listRCU.txt, which is NOT fixed in this patch, > > is that no reason or explaination is given for using call_rcu() instead of > > the normal synchronize_rcu() call. > > Good catch!!! Indeed, call_rcu() did take three arguments at one time, > like back in 2.5 days... > > On the use of call_rcu() vs. synchronize_rcu(), the two possible reasons > called out in question 8 in Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt are: > > 1. Update performance is important. > > 2. Updaters cannot block. And an important special case of #2 is when the update is being carried out within an RCU read-side critical section, FWIW. Thanx, Paul > I would welcome a patch to this file discussing this. > > Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk> > > --- > > > > Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt | 6 +++--- > > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt > > index 1fd1753..4349c14 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt > > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ Following are the RCU equivalents for these two functions: > > list_for_each_entry(e, list, list) { > > if (!audit_compare_rule(rule, &e->rule)) { > > list_del_rcu(&e->list); > > - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); > > + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); > > return 0; > > } > > } > > @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ RCU ("read-copy update") its name. The RCU code is as follows: > > ne->rule.action = newaction; > > ne->rule.file_count = newfield_count; > > list_replace_rcu(e, ne); > > - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); > > + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); > > return 0; > > } > > } > > @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ flag under the spinlock as follows: > > list_del_rcu(&e->list); > > e->deleted = 1; > > spin_unlock(&e->lock); > > - call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule, e); > > + call_rcu(&e->rcu, audit_free_rule); > > return 0; > > } > > } > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation. 2009-03-06 13:27 [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2009-03-06 13:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] Doc: Fix wrong API example usage of call_rcu() Jesper Dangaard Brouer @ 2009-03-07 5:42 ` Paul E. McKenney 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Paul E. McKenney @ 2009-03-07 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer; +Cc: David Miller, netdev On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 02:27:33PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > Trivial fix while reading through the RCU docs. Good eyes! Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk> > --- > > Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt b/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt > index 95821a2..7aa2002 100644 > --- a/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt > +++ b/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ o I hear that RCU needs work in order to support realtime kernels? > This work is largely completed. Realtime-friendly RCU can be > enabled via the CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU kernel configuration parameter. > However, work is in progress for enabling priority boosting of > - preempted RCU read-side critical sections.This is needed if you > + preempted RCU read-side critical sections. This is needed if you > have CPU-bound realtime threads. > > o Where can I find more information on RCU? > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-03-09 0:53 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2009-03-06 13:27 [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2009-03-06 13:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] Doc: Fix wrong API example usage of call_rcu() Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2009-03-07 5:49 ` Paul E. McKenney 2009-03-09 0:53 ` Paul E. McKenney 2009-03-07 5:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] Doc: Fix missing whitespaces in RCU documentation Paul E. McKenney
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.