From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: Add cond_resched_rcu_lock() helper Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 10:30:35 -0700 Message-ID: <20130501173035.GT3780@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1367290378-29224-2-git-send-email-horms@verge.net.au> <20130430072944.GA13959@verge.net.au> <20130501091012.GB28253@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130501124637.GO3780@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130501151752.GA7521@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> <1367422195.11020.46.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20130501160218.GQ3780@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130501165748.GD7521@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Eric Dumazet , Julian Anastasov , Simon Horman , Ingo Molnar , lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pablo Neira Ayuso , Dipankar Sarma To: Peter Zijlstra Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130501165748.GD7521@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 06:57:49PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:02:18AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > My guess would be for the case where sched_preempt_enable_no_resched() > > is followed some time later by cond_resched(). > > I might hope not.. preempt_enable_no_resched() is nasty and you're likely to be > hit with a frozen fish of sorts by tglx if you try to use it ;-) I will stick with my guess, though I agree that if I am correct, this situation almost certainly predates tglx's Linux-related use of frozen fish as projectile weapons. ;-) Thanx, Paul