From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3 v3] rcu: Detect rcu uses under extended quiescent state
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:20:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110624112045.GF8058@somewhere.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110624035311.GB2266@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:53:11PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 01:12:37AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > This time I have no current practical cases to fix. Those I fixed
> > in previous versions were actually using rcu_dereference_raw(), which
> > is legal in extended qs.
> >
> > Frederic Weisbecker (3):
> > rcu: Detect illegal rcu dereference in extended quiescent state
> > rcu: Inform the user about dynticks idle mode on PROVE_RCU warning
> > rcu: Warn when rcu_read_lock() is used in extended quiescent state
> >
> > include/linux/rcupdate.h | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > kernel/lockdep.c | 4 +++
> > kernel/rcupdate.c | 4 +++
> > kernel/rcutiny.c | 13 +++++++++
> > kernel/rcutree.c | 14 +++++++++
> > 5 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> Queued, thank you, Frederic!
>
> I have also applied your approach to SRCU, and I applied the following
> to simplify the code a bit -- please let me know if there are any
> problems with this approach.
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> rcu: Remove one layer of abstraction from PROVE_RCU checking
>
> Simplify things a bit by substituting the definitions of the single-line
> rcu_read_acquire(), rcu_read_release(), rcu_read_acquire_bh(),
> rcu_read_release_bh(), rcu_read_acquire_sched(), and
> rcu_read_release_sched() functions at their call points.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Yeah looks good. Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-24 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-23 23:12 [PATCH 0/3 v3] rcu: Detect rcu uses under extended quiescent state Frederic Weisbecker
2011-06-23 23:12 ` [PATCH 1/3] rcu: Detect illegal rcu dereference in " Frederic Weisbecker
2011-06-23 23:12 ` [PATCH 2/3] rcu: Inform the user about dynticks idle mode on PROVE_RCU warning Frederic Weisbecker
2011-06-23 23:12 ` [PATCH 3/3] rcu: Warn when rcu_read_lock() is used in extended quiescent state Frederic Weisbecker
2011-06-24 3:53 ` [PATCH 0/3 v3] rcu: Detect rcu uses under " Paul E. McKenney
2011-06-24 11:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2011-06-26 1:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-06-26 1:55 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-06-26 2:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-06-24 9:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-24 11:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-06-25 5:10 ` 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=20110624112045.GF8058@somewhere.redhat.com \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox