On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 08:55:08AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 02:09:28AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > tree_plugin.h is now gathering not only the (no)preempt-rcu specifics > > but also other features like NO_CB. As the latter has grown quite in > > complexity and volume, it's may be a good idea to start moving the > > related code to its own file so we don't need to browse thousand lines > > to find what we need. > > > > Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Applied with the usual wordsmithing, thank you! > > But for consistency with the other similar files included by > kernel/rcu/tree.c, should the name instead be kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h? Ah yes, I hesitated but tree_nocb.h is indeed more consistent. Can I let you do the rename? > Also, if Ingo and I are one the author list, shouldn't you be as well? ;-) Heh, alright feel free to add the following as a fixup :-) diff --git a/kernel/rcu/nocb.h b/kernel/rcu/nocb.h index a7783923833e..bf2690ca5d2b 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/nocb.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/nocb.h @@ -6,9 +6,11 @@ * * Copyright Red Hat, 2009 * Copyright IBM Corporation, 2009 + * Copyright SUSE, 2021 * * Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> + * Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx> */ #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU Or perhaps you prefer a separate patch? Thanks!
