From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S932729AbYEHT1O@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932729AbYEHT1O (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 8 May 2008 15:27:14 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756992AbYEHT0t
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 8 May 2008 15:26:49 -0400
Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:34084 "EHLO
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751185AbYEHT0r (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 8 May 2008 15:26:47 -0400
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 12:25:14 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
Cc: paulmck@us.ibm.com, joe@perches.com, davem@davemloft.net,
       netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm][v2] ratelimit rewrite
Message-Id: <20080508122514.63482a06.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080506022558.GA2904@darkstar.te-china.tietoenator.com>
References: <20080506022558.GA2904@darkstar.te-china.tietoenator.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 6 May 2008 10:25:58 +0800
Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com> wrote:

>  static inline void rcu_enter_nohz(void)
>  {
> +	static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, 10 * HZ, 1);
>  	smp_mb(); /* CPUs seeing ++ must see prior RCU read-side crit sects */
>  	__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks++;
> -	WARN_ON_SECS(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1, 10);
> +	WARN_ON_RATELIMIT(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1, &rs);
>  }
>  
>  static inline void rcu_exit_nohz(void)
>  {
> +	static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, 10 * HZ, 1);
>  	__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks++;
>  	smp_mb(); /* CPUs seeing ++ must see later RCU read-side crit sects */
> -	WARN_ON_SECS(!(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1), 10);
> +	WARN_ON_RATELIMIT(!(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1),
> +			&rs);

Why are we altering the RCU code in this patch, btw?  It seems fairly
random that we happened to choose these particular WARN_ONs.  Do they have
a history of triggering?