[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090408174841.GE6745@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 10:48:41 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dipankar@...ibm.com, niv@...ibm.com,
manfred@...orfullife.com, peterz@...radead.org,
lethal@...ux-sh.org, kernel@...tstofly.org, andi@...stfloor.org,
kyle@...artin.ca, deller@....de, davem@...emloft.net,
ralf@...ux-mips.org, jes@....com, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
paulus@...ba.org, anton@...ba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] Convert CONFIG_SMP=y powerpc defconfigs to
TREE_RCU.
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 02:46:23PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 12:17:56PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 09:21:58AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> > > > > <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > > > > From: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Why would one want to do this? The commit log doesn't explain the
> > > > > switch and why it's great. Mostly because the commit log doesn't
> > > > > exist. (I'll stop channeling Andrew now)
> > > >
> > > > Indeed, I am sure that I will get the hang the relevant git
> > > > commands at some point, but clearly am not yet there.
> > > >
> > > > The thing that is great about this patch is that it is a step on
> > > > the way to retiring Classic RCU entirely.
> > >
> > > I'd suggest you dont do these dozens of defconfig updates at all -
> > > arch maintainers can do this themselves, once the core kernel
> > > default has been flipped.
> >
> > I am of course personally quite happy with this approach in the
> > short term, as I would only need to worry about one patch.
> >
> > My one concern would be that we cannot retire Classic RCU until
> > all the arch maintainers remove CONFIG_CLASSIC_RCU=y from their
> > defconfig files. However, given that the attached script suffices,
> > I am not too worried about that.
>
> ah, that's not a real concern. Most defconfigs are stale all the
> time, and arch maintainers typically refresh them at around rc7.
> (if at all) Kconfig will warn about (and ignore) stale entries.
>
> So no, there's no requirement to touch defconfigs - to the contrary:
> it has way too wide of a cross section with other trees to be really
> practical to carry in the RCU tree.
Sounds good to me!!! So, is http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/3/561
sufficient, or should I repost?
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists