From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752208Ab1GYQVz (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:21:55 -0400 Received: from e7.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.137]:42434 "EHLO e7.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751290Ab1GYQVx (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:21:53 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:21:33 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Paul Turner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bharata B Rao , Dhaval Giani , Balbir Singh , Vaidyanathan Srinivasan , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , Kamalesh Babulal , Hidetoshi Seto , Ingo Molnar , Pavel Emelyanov , Jason Baron Subject: Re: [patch 00/18] CFS Bandwidth Control v7.2 Message-ID: <20110725162133.GI2327@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20110721164325.231521704@google.com> <1311605881.24752.2.camel@twins> <1311606041.24752.3.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1311606041.24752.3.camel@twins> 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 Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:00:41PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2011-07-25 at 16:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > + rcu_read_lock(); > > + ret = walk_tg_tree_from(tg, tg_set_cfs_period_down, NULL, &period); > > + rcu_read_unlock(); > > rcu over a mutex doesn't really work in mainline, bah.. SRCU can handle that situation, FWIW. But yes, blocking in an RCU read-side critical section is a no-no. Thanx, Paul