From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751552Ab3AHEXA (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2013 23:23:00 -0500 Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.197]:50833 "EHLO relay5-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750809Ab3AHEW7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2013 23:22:59 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 41547 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 23:22:59 EST X-Originating-IP: 217.70.178.152 X-Originating-IP: 50.43.39.152 Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:22:50 -0800 From: Josh Triplett To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, sbw@mit.edu, patches@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/1] Tiny RCU changes for 3.9 Message-ID: <20130108042249.GB12974@leaf> References: <20130105175059.GA15961@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130107155810.GC11145@leaf> <20130107165748.GF2525@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130107175606.GA9962@jtriplet-mobl1> <20130107221915.GA2525@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130107221915.GA2525@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 Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 02:19:15PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 09:56:06AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 08:57:48AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 07:58:10AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > > This patch seems reasonable to me, but the repeated use of #if > > > > defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_RCU_TRACE) seems somewhat > > > > annoying, and fragile if you ever decide to change the conditions. How > > > > about defining an appropriate symbol in Kconfig for stall warnings, and > > > > using that? > > > > > > But I only just removed the config option for SMP RCU stall warnings. ;-) > > > > > > But I must agree that "defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_RCU_TRACE)" > > > is a bit obscure. The rationale is that RCU stall warnings are > > > unconditionally enabled in SMP kernels, but don't want to be in > > > TINY_RCU kernels due to size constraints. I therefore put it under > > > CONFIG_RCU_TRACE, which also contains other TINY_RCU debugging-style > > > options. Would adding a comment to this effect help? > > > > I understand the rationale; I just think it would become clearer if you > > added an internal-only Kconfig symbol selected in both cases and change > > the conditionals to use that. > > My concern was that this would confuse people into thinking that the > code under those #ifdefs was all the stall-warning code that there was. > > I suppose this could be forestalled with a suitably clever name... > CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_TINY_TOO? Better names? How about CONFIG_RCU_STALL_COMMON, with associated help text saying "include the stall-detection code common to both rcutree and rcutiny"? - Josh Triplett