From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758110AbbIVPLR (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:11:17 -0400 Received: from e39.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.160]:40713 "EHLO e39.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756006AbbIVPLM (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:11:12 -0400 X-Helo: d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com X-MailFrom: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-RcptTo: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:10:51 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Sasha Levin Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, 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, bobby.prani@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/19] rcu: Extend expedited funnel locking to rcu_data structure Message-ID: <20150922151051.GL4029@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20150717232901.GA22511@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1437175764-24096-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1437175764-24096-14-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <55FEC99A.7050506@oracle.com> <20150921041244.GF4029@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <56007F02.2070807@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56007F02.2070807@oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15092215-0033-0000-0000-000005F9CC00 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 06:04:50PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 09/21/2015 12:12 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Hmmm... I created rdp->exp_funnel_mutex, but failed to give RCU-sched > > its own lock class. Does the following untested patch fix things for you? > > Haven't reproduced yet, but it didn't happen that often before - let's give it > another day or two of testing? Fair enough! I didn't see it in my testing, but later patches eliminate this locking situation entirely, so I didn't put that much time into it. Thanx, Paul