From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757516Ab0GNVQ6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:16:58 -0400 Received: from e7.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.137]:53717 "EHLO e7.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757146Ab0GNVQ4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:16:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:16:51 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Josh Triplett Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 27/30] rcu: apply ->rda changes to rcutree_trace.c Message-ID: <20100714211651.GF2417@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20100714200945.GA10535@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1279138204-12849-27-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100714211230.GA4624@feather> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100714211230.GA4624@feather> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 02:12:31PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 01:10:01PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > The print_rcu_pendings() function used the ->rda[] array, so this > > commit makes it instead use per_cpu_ptr(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > > --- > > kernel/rcutree_trace.c | 2 +- > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_trace.c b/kernel/rcutree_trace.c > > index 36c95b4..458e032 100644 > > --- a/kernel/rcutree_trace.c > > +++ b/kernel/rcutree_trace.c > > @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ static void print_rcu_pendings(struct seq_file *m, struct rcu_state *rsp) > > struct rcu_data *rdp; > > > > for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { > > - rdp = rsp->rda[cpu]; > > + rdp = per_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda, cpu); > > if (rdp->beenonline) > > print_one_rcu_pending(m, rdp); > > } > > For the final version of this patchset, this should get squashed into > the previous patch, right? Otherwise, the state after the previous > patch but before this one won't compile. Makes sense, given that the earlier patch has not yet gone upstream. Thanx, Paul