Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] Implement call_rcu_lazy() and miscellaneous fixes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 08:29:37AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 03:18:04PM +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 03:21:31PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 01:51:54PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 09:32:32PM +0000, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > > > > Hello!
> > > > > 
> > > > > Please find the next improved version of call_rcu_lazy() attached.  The main
> > > > > difference between the previous versions is that:
> > > > > - In v2 rcu_barrier is fixed to not hang (I found this to be due to a missing
> > > > >   GP thread wakeup), now I am limiting this wake up only to rcu_barrier() as
> > > > >   requested by Paul.
> > > > > - Fixed checkpatch and build robot issues.
> > > > > - Some more changes to 'lazy' parameter passing and consolidation of segcblist
> > > > >   functions.
> > > > > - more testing via rcutorture and rcuscale.
> > > > 
> > > > Thank you!  What I am going to do is to pull these into an experimental
> > > > not-for-mainline branch and run the usual set of rcutorture tests.
> > > > I will then take a look at the patches.
> > > 
> > > And there were a few conflicts with the nocb patch series in -rcu.
> > > The allegedly conflict-resolved series is here: joel.2022.07.14a
> > > Please let me know if I messed something up.
> > 
> > Thanks, it looks Ok. There is one robot fix for hexagon's arch where I think
> > TREE_RCU is disabled, could you apply the diff below to patch 1/5 ?
> > 
> > Or, I can also just keep it in my version of 1/5 to go out with the next rev.
> 
> Given that I am not testing on hexagon, I will let you fix this one on
> the next rev.  If someone out there is testing this branch on hexagon,
> they should feel free to apply your patch locally.  ;-)

I am pretty sure this is the feature that was going to make Hexagon widely
adopted, but your call ;-)

thanks,

 - Joel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux