On 07/05/24 15:32, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > Le Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:17:21AM +0200, Valentin Schneider a écrit : >> The context_tracking.state RCU_DYNTICKS subvariable has been renamed to >> RCU_WATCHING, reflect that change in the related helpers. >> >> Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 8 ++++---- >> kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 2 +- >> kernel/rcu/tree_stall.h | 2 +- >> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c >> index 857c2565efeac..d772755ccd564 100644 >> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c >> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c >> @@ -308,9 +308,9 @@ static int rcu_watching_snap(int cpu) >> >> /* >> * Return true if the snapshot returned from rcu_watching_snap() >> - * indicates that RCU is in an extended quiescent state. >> + * indicates that RCU in an extended quiescent state (not watching). > > *is in > Oh, thanks! >> */ >> -static bool rcu_dynticks_in_eqs(int snap) >> +static bool rcu_watching_in_eqs(int snap) > > I would be tempted to propose rcu_watching_snap_in_eqs() but the > purpose is not to dissuade people from intoning RCU code after all. > I've struggled with finding something sensible for the snapshot helpers; I think I prefer your suggestion, that way we can have a common prefix for all snapshot-related helpers. Also I keep reading rcu_watching_in_eqs() as "is RCU watching while being in EQS?" which is nonsense. > Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx>
