On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 06:34:03PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > This is v6. It is based on the Paul's "dev" branch: > > HEAD: f1bfe538c7970283040a7188a291aca9f18f0c42 > > please note, that patches should be applied from scratch, > i.e. the v5 has to be dropped from the "dev". > > v5 -> v6: > - Fix a race due to realising a wait-head from the gp-kthread; > - Use our own private workqueue with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM to have > at least one execution context. > > v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240220183115.74124-1-urezki@xxxxxxxxx/ > v4: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZZ2bi5iPwXLgjB-f@xxxxxxxxxx/T/ > v3: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cd45b0b5-f86b-43fb-a5f3-47d340cd4f9f@paulmck-laptop/T/ > v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231030131254.488186-1-urezki@xxxxxxxxx/T/ > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231025140915.590390-1-urezki@xxxxxxxxx/T/ Queued in place of your earlier series, thank you! Not urgent, but which rcutorture scenario should be pressed into service testing this? Thanx, Paul > Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) (6): > rcu: Add data structures for synchronize_rcu() > rcu: Reduce synchronize_rcu() latency > rcu: Add a trace event for synchronize_rcu_normal() > rcu: Support direct wake-up of synchronize_rcu() users > rcu: Do not release a wait-head from a GP kthread > rcu: Allocate WQ with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM bit set > > .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 14 + > include/trace/events/rcu.h | 27 ++ > kernel/rcu/tree.c | 361 +++++++++++++++++- > kernel/rcu/tree.h | 20 + > kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 2 +- > 5 files changed, 422 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.39.2 >
