From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rcutorture: Fix rcu_barrier successes counter
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 08:41:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180619154139.GG3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180619091223.702f05d6@gandalf.local.home>
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:12:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
> Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Paul,
> > Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
> > 'successful attempts' than 'successful test' ? If so, then perhaps you can
> > drop this patch. It wasn't clear to me what the 'successes' meant so I may
> > have been a bit misled into changing its meaning. If on the other hand, it
> > means 'successful test', then yes this patch would be Ok then. thanks! -Joel
>
> In either case, it sounds like a comment should be added to clarify
> what n_barrier_successes actually means ;-)
Or change the name to n_barrier_attempts. Except that there already
is an n_barrier_attempts, and it is incremented on each attempt.
So perhaps the original patch is on-point. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-19 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-19 6:22 [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Assign higher priority to RCU threads if its rcutorture Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 6:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] rcutorture: Fix rcu_barrier successes counter Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 7:31 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 13:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-06-19 15:41 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-06-19 22:16 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 6:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Assign higher priority to RCU threads if its rcutorture Joel Fernandes
2018-06-19 16:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-06-19 22:19 ` Joel Fernandes
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=20180619154139.GG3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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