From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
oleg@redhat.com, sbw@mit.edu, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/17] rcu: remove CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_DELAY
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 06:56:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140708135600.GG4603@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1404807066.26126.9.camel@x220>
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 10:11:06AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> Paul,
>
> On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 15:38 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > The CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_DELAY Kconfig parameter doesn't appear to be very
> > effective at finding race conditions, so this commit removes it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/rcu/tree.c | 5 -----
> > kernel/rcu/update.c | 3 ---
>
> The commit explanation implies that this patch would also remove the
> entry for PROVE_RCU_DELAY in lib/Kconfig.debug. Is there any reason to
> keep it after this patch?
>
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE01 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE02 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE02-T | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE03 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE04 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE05 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE06 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE07 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE08 | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE08-T | 1 -
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE09 | 1 -
> > 13 files changed, 19 deletions(-)
>
> This doesn't touch a few other references in
> tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/. I have no idea how these tests
> work, so I assume these references are still needed. Is that correct?
Good catch on both counts, fixed.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-08 13:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-07 22:37 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/17] Miscellaneous fixes for 3.17 Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/17] rcu: Document deadlock-avoidance information for rcu_read_unlock() Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/17] rcu: Handle obsolete references to TINY_PREEMPT_RCU Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/17] signal: Explain local_irq_save() call Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 9:01 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-07-08 15:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/17] rcu: Make rcu node arrays static const char * const Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/17] rcu: remove redundant ACCESS_ONCE() from tick_do_timer_cpu Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 14:46 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/17] rcu: Eliminate read-modify-write ACCESS_ONCE() calls Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 16:59 ` Pranith Kumar
2014-07-08 20:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 20:43 ` Pranith Kumar
2014-07-08 21:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/17] rcu: Loosen __call_rcu()'s rcu_head alignment constraint Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/17] rcu: Allow post-unlock reference for rt_mutex Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-09 1:50 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-07-09 16:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/17] rcu: Check both root and current rcu_node when setting up future grace period Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/17] rcu: Simplify priority boosting by putting rt_mutex in rcu_node Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/17] rcu: Bind grace-period kthreads to non-NO_HZ_FULL CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 15:24 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-08 15:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 18:38 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-08 19:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 20:40 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-08 22:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-09 15:40 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-11 18:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-07-11 18:25 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-11 18:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-11 18:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-11 19:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-11 19:26 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-11 19:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-11 19:55 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-11 19:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-07-11 19:11 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-11 20:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-11 20:45 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-12 1:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-14 13:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-07-11 20:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-14 13:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-07-11 18:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/17] rcu: Don't use NMIs to dump other CPUs' stacks Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/17] rcu: Use __this_cpu_read() instead of per_cpu_ptr() Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/17] rcu: remove CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_DELAY Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-08 8:11 ` Paul Bolle
2014-07-08 13:56 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 15/17] rcu: Fix __rcu_reclaim() to use true/false for bool Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 16/17] rcu: Fix a sparse warning in rcu_initiate_boost() Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-07 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 17/17] rcu: Fix a sparse warning in rcu_report_unblock_qs_rnp() Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-09 2:14 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/17] Miscellaneous fixes for 3.17 Lai Jiangshan
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=20140708135600.GG4603@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pebolle@tiscali.nl \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--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