[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 09:30:39 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, patches@...aro.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 21/41] rcu: Inform RCU of irq_exit()
activity
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 06:30:33PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 11:41:39AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > [ Alternatively, delaying the ->rcu_read_lock_nesting decrement
> > until after the special handling would make the thing more robust
> > in the face of interrupts as well. And there is a separate patch
> > for that. ]
>
> Where does that separate patch live, and should it replace this one?
It is #18 in this series: "rcu: Protect __rcu_read_unlock() against
scheduler-using irq handlers". Both are needed. I will rework the
commit message appropriately.
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