On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 02:04:11PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > ----- On Apr 9, 2019, at 1:55 PM, paulmck paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > [...] > > The current state is not horrible, so my thought would be to give it > > some time to see if better thoughts arise. > > > > Either way, cleanup_srcu_struct() keeps its current checks for callbacks > > still being in flight, which is why I believe that the current state is > > not horrible. ;-) > > In that case, I think the comment above cleanup_srcu_struct_quiesced() in > include/linux/srcu.h needs to be updated to cover situations where API > users statically define a SRCU domain in a module and intend to unload > that module. > > Given that we end up doing the allocation/cleanup under the hood, the > API users don't interact with init_srcu_struct() nor cleanup_srcu_struct(), > so it's not obvious that this comment also applies to them. Actually, it turned out that cleanup_srcu_struct_quiesced() is extremely hard to use correctly, and maybe even impossible to use correctly. So cleanup_srcu_struct_quiesced has been eliminated in current -rcu. Thanx, Paul > Thanks, > > Mathieu > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > EfficiOS Inc. > http://www.efficios.com > _______________________________________________ amd-gfx mailing list amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
