From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755397Ab3LJPzz (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:55:55 -0500 Received: from mail-ea0-f178.google.com ([209.85.215.178]:55828 "EHLO mail-ea0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755462Ab3LJPzt (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:55:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 16:55:46 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Tejun Heo Cc: Christoph Lameter , akpm@linuxfoundation.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/41] percpu: Add raw_cpu_ops Message-ID: <20131210155546.GD1995@gmail.com> References: <20131203233232.928771708@linux.com> <20131203233251.745099192@linux.com> <20131210153445.GE4610@htj.dyndns.org> <20131210154506.GA1884@gmail.com> <20131210154951.GF4610@htj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131210154951.GF4610@htj.dyndns.org> 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 * Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 04:45:06PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Tejun Heo wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 05:32:45PM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > The patches following this one will add preemption checks to __this_cpu > > > > ops so we need to have an alternative way to use this_cpu operations > > > > without preemption checks. > > > > > > > > raw_cpu_ops will be the basis for all other ops since these will be the > > > > operations that do not implement any checks. > > > > > > > > Primitive operations are renamed by this patch from __this_cpu_xxx to > > > > raw_cpu_xxxx. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter > > > > > > Applied to percpu/for-3.14. > > > > Please also pick up the related debugging bits: > > > > [PATCH 18/41] percpu: Add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops > > > > as we don't want to expand percpu ops without doing proper debugging. > > Yeah, trying to figure out which should go through which tree. > Christoph, should I also pickup 14? Or can that go through x86? Well, it appears to have dependencies so I doubt it can be kept separate. In any case, provided all debugging is properly productized: Acked-by: Ingo Molnar Thanks, Ingo