Re: [GIT PULL] Additional RCU fixes for 2.6.34

[Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>]

On Thu, May 06 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, May 06 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > 
> > > * Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, May 06 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Hello, Ingo,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Here are three more RCU-lockdep fixes for 2.6.34:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-2.6-rcu.git rcu/urgent
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 							Thanx, Paul
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ------------------>
> > > > > > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> (1)
> > > > > > 	blk-cgroup: Fix RCU correctness warning in cfq_init_queue()
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (2)
> > > > > > 	vfs: fix RCU-lockdep false positive due to /proc access
> > > > > > 	memcg: css_id() must be called under rcu_read_lock()
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  block/cfq-iosched.c      |    2 ++
> > > > > >  include/linux/fdtable.h  |    3 ++-
> > > > > >  include/linux/rcupdate.h |   11 +++++++++++
> > > > > >  kernel/rcupdate.c        |   11 +++++++++++
> > > > > >  mm/memcontrol.c          |   21 ++++++++++++++++-----
> > > > > >  5 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Pulled, thanks Paul!
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jens, is that blk-cgroup fix from Vivek fine to you via this route?
> > > > 
> > > > Sure, I did think it was a bit odd to funnel it through that route, but it's 
> > > > no big deal.
> > > 
> > > I havent pushed the tree out yet, wanted to wait for your feedback before 
> > > doing anything permanent. You can still apply it to the block tree.
> > > 
> > > You were Cc:-ed 3 days ago to this patch, when RCU fixes got posted. These are 
> > > basically the leftover PROVE_RCU fix patches that didnt get picked up by 
> > > subsystem trees.
> > 
> > Yes I read it then, and Paul said he'd applied it. So I didn't touch it, it 
> > was trivial enough that the path to the kernel wasn't that big of a problem. 
> > And it didn't cause me any merge issues, so no harm done.
> > 
> > I can easily pull it in since I have a fix or two for .34 left yet, but if 
> > you already have it stashed and ready to submit, lets just leave it there.
> 
> Yeah, please apply it to the block tree (i have just zapped it from my local 
> tree), we really want subsystem patches to go via their respective trees. I've 
> attached the latest patch below.
> 
> Thanks!

Done!

-- 
Jens Axboe