On 2021-08-05 09:03:37 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Makes sense to me! > > But would another of the -rt people be willing to give an Acked-by? > For example, maybe they would prefer this kernel boot parameter to be > exposed only if (!PREEMPT_RT || NO_HZ_FULL). Or are there !NO_HZ_FULL > situations where rcu_normal_after_boot makes sense? Julia crafted that "rcu_normal_after_boot = 1" for RT after we had more and more synchronize_rcu_expedited() users popping up. I would like to keep that part (default value) since it good to have for most users. I don't mind removing CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT part here if there are legitimate use cases for using "rcu_normal_after_boot = 0". Paul suggested initially to restrict that option for PREEMPT_RT and I would follow here Paul's guidance to either remove it or restrict it to NO_HZ_FULL in RT's case (as suggested). > Thanx, Paul Sebastian
