From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rcutorture: Fix rcu_barrier successes counter
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 08:41:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180619154139.GG3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180619091223.702f05d6@gandalf.local.home>
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:12:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
> Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Paul,
> > Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> > 'successful attempts' than 'successful test' ? If so, then perhaps you can
> > drop this patch. It wasn't clear to me what the 'successes' meant so I may
> > have been a bit misled into changing its meaning. If on the other hand, it
> > means 'successful test', then yes this patch would be Ok then. thanks! -Joel
>
> In either case, it sounds like a comment should be added to clarify
> what n_barrier_successes actually means ;-)
Or change the name to n_barrier_attempts. Except that there already
is an n_barrier_attempts, and it is incremented on each attempt.
So perhaps the original patch is on-point. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-19 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-19 6:22 [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Assign higher priority to RCU threads if its rcutorture Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 6:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] rcutorture: Fix rcu_barrier successes counter Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 7:31 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 13:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-06-19 15:41 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-06-19 22:16 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 6:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Assign higher priority to RCU threads if its rcutorture Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 16:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-06-19 22:19 ` Joel Fernandes
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=20180619154139.GG3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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.