From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E1AC433EF for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:39:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2B9205C9 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:39:48 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CA2B9205C9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966799AbeFSPjr (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:47 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:33386 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964999AbeFSPjn (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:43 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w5JFdVNQ030347 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:43 -0400 Received: from e15.ny.us.ibm.com (e15.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.205]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2jq389c7ws-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:42 -0400 Received: from localhost by e15.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:42 -0400 Received: from b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.24) by e15.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.202) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:40 -0400 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w5JFddJq8061322 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:39:39 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4662B2066; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95FA7B2065; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.70.82.159]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:39:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B663716C3C5C; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 08:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 08:41:39 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Joel Fernandes , Joel Fernandes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com, Josh Triplett , Lai Jiangshan , Mathieu Desnoyers , Byungchul Park Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rcutorture: Fix rcu_barrier successes counter Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20180619062215.221564-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20180619062215.221564-2-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20180619073115.GA241700@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> <20180619091223.702f05d6@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180619091223.702f05d6@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18061915-0068-0000-0000-0000030B3837 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00009220; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000265; SDB=6.01049295; UDB=6.00537643; IPR=6.00828268; MB=3.00021740; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-06-19 15:39:42 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18061915-0069-0000-0000-000044BD3502 Message-Id: <20180619154139.GG3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-06-19_08:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1805220000 definitions=main-1806190174 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:12:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700 > Joel Fernandes 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