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=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 92CECC3A59B for ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:30:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E5B02075E for ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:30:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelfernandes.org header.i=@joelfernandes.org header.b="laG2+Nxv" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725911AbfHQEan (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:30:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f194.google.com ([209.85.215.194]:46920 "EHLO mail-pg1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725889AbfHQEam (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:30:42 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f194.google.com with SMTP id m3so3301284pgv.13 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:30:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelfernandes.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=gam5/JgpEz7478TT1VCHez++Gfwsns89IHEVFVLSr8Q=; b=laG2+Nxv0B64t6/nv+EeOygMx1pbhmZiu87TaPe0iUfVYmJjX+30WfYa0Hnw2rpRiy SrYKT3046yJwFQ7Ca5Z1Ng7wzo4hw7S8EBCFW/F+1z9kcxXIST5+4nI3PHF9iUacgyBk rTxRLbb5vrMkVdbYrumIqRhwBbLYI76ygVqeo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=gam5/JgpEz7478TT1VCHez++Gfwsns89IHEVFVLSr8Q=; b=qblCapp4soICsRFzSjUUDlWTWROdw+9MHherNUWJLQqivKPCGCEekhr3S01jyc7vqx eghjmwHMh9uRl+xMfaaVa7d2+YhKVGbe2B/V5/cC/ACd8svQq5+t8Syn75BZjz2fLdVf lHgwbM4Knj+pau2KENy3EhWLkFrUnRjFQeDjL+PMSuyWXtKLs/B6hU1rqHTTppt3EnbA tbaoSpMzZw1/PT3P1G0wUqvMpDRW1WdHNEjJcnCSESsFXVh3CHslbMlX03crYwJi7MEw J7Vk6cBARyw+QmLCGEiaJ182RuAJ8igycOaNiXH7uhvbvkhlL0/m/N2igQLPOWVG2jPC MgJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXtDImtN+z37OH21wrP/B11I/LqcQhEWiJZLQfXb0+asW7ke4H7 zaoRX8Zr/jGAtLPf0kAFlT5qNqyVbhs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx4KO0UhYlQRcR4hUAYds+M7jp9fZWDNHA2rEMOc2ajaLyZvZ81gWdaScSAK1Iex3hdMMmteQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:9604:: with SMTP id v4mr10217906pjo.66.1566016242080; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([172.19.216.18]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t70sm6115416pjb.2.2019.08.16.21.30.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:30:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:30:24 -0400 From: Joel Fernandes To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: LKML , kernel-team , kernel-team , Byungchul Park , Davidlohr Bueso , Josh Triplett , Lai Jiangshan , Mathieu Desnoyers , Byungchul Park , Rao Shoaib , rcu , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] rcu/tree: Add basic support for kfree_rcu() batching Message-ID: <20190817043024.GA137383@google.com> References: <20190814160411.58591-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20190816164330.GA8320@linux.ibm.com> <20190816174429.GE10481@google.com> <20190816191629.GW28441@linux.ibm.com> <20190817035637.GY28441@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190817035637.GY28441@linux.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: rcu-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: rcu@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 08:56:37PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 09:32:23PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 3:16 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > Hello, Joel, > > > > > > > > > > I reworked the commit log as follows, but was then unsuccessful in > > > > > working out which -rcu commit to apply it to. Could you please > > > > > tell me what commit to apply this to? (Once applied, git cherry-pick > > > > > is usually pretty good about handling minor conflicts.) > > > > > > > > It was originally based on v5.3-rc2 > > > > > > > > I was able to apply it just now to the rcu -dev branch and I pushed it here: > > > > https://github.com/joelagnel/linux-kernel.git (branch paul-dev) > > > > > > > > Let me know if any other issues, thanks for the change log rework! > > > > > > Pulled and cherry-picked, thank you! > > > > > > Just for grins, I also pushed out a from-joel.2019.08.16a showing the > > > results of the pull. If you pull that branch, then run something like > > > "gitk v5.3-rc2..", and then do the same with branch "dev", comparing the > > > two might illustrate some of the reasons for the current restrictions > > > on pull requests and trees subject to rebase. > > > > Right, I did the compare and see what you mean. I guess sending any > > future pull requests against Linux -next would be the best option? > > Hmmm... You really want to send some pull requests, don't you? ;-) I would be lying if I said I don't have the itch to ;-) > Suppose you had sent that pull request against Linux -next or v5.2 > or wherever. What would happen next, given the high probability of a > conflict with someone else's patch? What would the result look like? One hopes that the tools are able to automatically resolve the resolution, however adequate re-inspection of the resulting code and testing it would be needed in either case, to ensure the conflict resolution (whether manual or automatic) happened correctly. IIUC, this usually depends on the maintainer's preference on which branch to send patches against. Are you saying -rcu's dev branch is still the best option to send patches against, even though it is rebased often? thanks, - Joel