All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Rao Shoaib <rao.shoaib@oracle.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, brouer@redhat.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move kfree_call_rcu() to slab_common.c
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 12:24:54 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180102202454.GQ7829@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <106f9cdb-bb0b-539d-547e-18c509ca1163@oracle.com>

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 07:17:35PM -0800, Rao Shoaib wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/21/2017 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>I left it out on purpose because the call in tiny is a little different
> >>
> >>rcutiny.h:
> >>
> >>static inline void kfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head,
> >>                   void (*func)(struct rcu_head *rcu))
> >>{
> >>     call_rcu(head, func);
> >>}
> >>
> >>tree.c:
> >>
> >>void kfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head,
> >>             void (*func)(struct rcu_head *rcu))
> >>{
> >>     __call_rcu(head, func, rcu_state_p, -1, 1);
> >>}
> >>EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kfree_call_rcu);
> >>
> >>If we want the code to be exactly same I can create a lazy version
> >>for tiny as well. However,  I don not know where to move
> >>kfree_call_rcu() from it's current home in rcutiny.h though. Any
> >>thoughts ?
> >I might be missing something subtle here, but in case I am not, my
> >suggestion is to simply rename rcutiny.h's kfree_call_rcu() and otherwise
> >leave it as is.  If you want to update the type of the second argument,
> >which got missed back in the day, there is always this:
> >
> >static inline void call_rcu_lazy(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func)
> >{
> >	call_rcu(head, func);
> >}
> >
> >The reason that Tiny RCU doesn't handle laziness specially is because
> >Tree RCU's handling of laziness is a big no-op on the single CPU systems
> >on which Tiny RCU runs.  So Tiny RCU need do nothing special to support
> >laziness.
> >
> >							Thanx, Paul
> >
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I can not just change the name as __kfree_call_rcu macro calls
> kfree_call_rcu(). I have made tiny version of kfree_call_rcu() call
> rcu_call_lazy() which calls call_rcu(). As far as the type is
> concerned, my bad, I cut and posted from an older release. Latest
> code is already using the typedef.

Hello, Rao,

Perhaps it would be best if you simply reposted the latest patch.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Rao Shoaib <rao.shoaib@oracle.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, brouer@redhat.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move kfree_call_rcu() to slab_common.c
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 12:24:54 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180102202454.GQ7829@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <106f9cdb-bb0b-539d-547e-18c509ca1163@oracle.com>

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 07:17:35PM -0800, Rao Shoaib wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/21/2017 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>I left it out on purpose because the call in tiny is a little different
> >>
> >>rcutiny.h:
> >>
> >>static inline void kfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head,
> >>                   void (*func)(struct rcu_head *rcu))
> >>{
> >>     call_rcu(head, func);
> >>}
> >>
> >>tree.c:
> >>
> >>void kfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head,
> >>             void (*func)(struct rcu_head *rcu))
> >>{
> >>     __call_rcu(head, func, rcu_state_p, -1, 1);
> >>}
> >>EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kfree_call_rcu);
> >>
> >>If we want the code to be exactly same I can create a lazy version
> >>for tiny as well. However,  I don not know where to move
> >>kfree_call_rcu() from it's current home in rcutiny.h though. Any
> >>thoughts ?
> >I might be missing something subtle here, but in case I am not, my
> >suggestion is to simply rename rcutiny.h's kfree_call_rcu() and otherwise
> >leave it as is.  If you want to update the type of the second argument,
> >which got missed back in the day, there is always this:
> >
> >static inline void call_rcu_lazy(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func)
> >{
> >	call_rcu(head, func);
> >}
> >
> >The reason that Tiny RCU doesn't handle laziness specially is because
> >Tree RCU's handling of laziness is a big no-op on the single CPU systems
> >on which Tiny RCU runs.  So Tiny RCU need do nothing special to support
> >laziness.
> >
> >							Thanx, Paul
> >
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I can not just change the name as __kfree_call_rcu macro calls
> kfree_call_rcu(). I have made tiny version of kfree_call_rcu() call
> rcu_call_lazy() which calls call_rcu(). As far as the type is
> concerned, my bad, I cut and posted from an older release. Latest
> code is already using the typedef.

Hello, Rao,

Perhaps it would be best if you simply reposted the latest patch.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-02 20:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-21  8:19 [PATCH] Move kfree_call_rcu() to slab_common.c rao.shoaib
2017-12-21  8:19 ` rao.shoaib
2017-12-21 12:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 12:36   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 17:31   ` Rao Shoaib
2017-12-21 17:31     ` Rao Shoaib
2017-12-22  1:39     ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-22  1:39       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-22  3:17       ` Rao Shoaib
2018-01-02 20:24         ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-01-02 20:24           ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-21 15:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-21 15:54   ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-21 17:06   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 17:06     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-22  1:27     ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-22  1:27       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-22  1:30       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-22  1:30         ` Paul E. McKenney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180102202454.GQ7829@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=brouer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=rao.shoaib@oracle.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.