From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754780Ab2GJJSt (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 05:18:49 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.213.46]:35074 "EHLO mail-yw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754590Ab2GJJSr (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 05:18:47 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:18:39 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Josh Triplett , LKML , Alessio Igor Bogani , Andrew Morton , Avi Kivity , Chris Metcalf , Christoph Lameter , Geoff Levand , Gilad Ben Yossef , Hakan Akkan , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Kevin Hilman , Max Krasnyansky , Peter Zijlstra , Stephen Hemminger , Steven Rostedt , Sven-Thorsten Dietrich , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86: Exit RCU extended QS on notify resume Message-ID: <20120710091836.GF8185@somewhere.redhat.com> References: <1341576018-10721-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1341576018-10721-7-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <20120706163338.GW2522@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120706204329.GA9163@leaf> <20120708211707.GG2522@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120708211707.GG2522@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 02:17:07PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 01:43:29PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 09:33:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 02:00:18PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig > > > > @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ config X86 > > > > select KTIME_SCALAR if X86_32 > > > > select GENERIC_STRNCPY_FROM_USER > > > > select GENERIC_STRNLEN_USER > > > > + select HAVE_RCU_USER_QS if X86_64 > > > > > > And I will bite yet again. Why only 64-bit kernels? > > > > Because HAVE_RCU_USER_QS requires an architecture-specific component, > > and this patch series only added the necessary bits to entry_64.S. > > OK, please allow me to rephrase the question. Why only entry_64.S? ;-) So like I said, I prefer to wait for reviews and general opinion before pushing further.