Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] RCU: Add TASK_RCU_OFFSET

[Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>]

On 03/31/2011 09:21 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:02:20AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> On 03/30/2011 07:46 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
>>> On 30.3.2011 12:57, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 12:55 +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] headers: Allow for lightweight inclusion of task_struct definition
>>>>>
>>>>> Factor out a couple of type definitions to <header>_types.h to allow
>>>>> using task_struct without pulling tons of new dependencies via sched.h.
>>>>
>>>> Urgh, not pretty.. so why not clean up sched.h properly? There's way too
>>>> much cruft in there.
>>>
>>> It was a proof-of-concept to show that it is doable to have proper
>>> definition of task_struct in rcupdate.h. Not an entry for any code
>>> beauty contest.
>>>
>>> Michal
>>>
>>
>> I like this cleanup, could you continue for this hard job? I will help you if required.
>>
>> Ingo & Peter - will you accept the patches when it is done.
>>
>> Acked-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> 
> I certainly like the idea of being able to inline TREE_PREEMPT_RCU's
> rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() using normal C code!
> 
> 							Thanx, Paul
> 

kernel-offset.c can be merged to some branch of your tree for
testing inlined TREE_PREEMPT_RCU's rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock()
before the kernel headers splitting is done.

Can the [patch 1/5] be merged to mainline earlier? could you add it to origin/rcu/next?

Thanks,
Lai