[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00000141128b3e55-996e72db-3257-4d38-801a-ab70a7a20ca2-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:20:18 +0000
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, dhowells@...hat.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com, sbw@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: Is it safe to enter an RCU read-side critical
section?
On Thu, 12 Sep 2013, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > I saw those, he posted 'needs testing' patches. He still behaved
> > > passive-aggressively, pretending that it was some difficult task to
> > > perform, as if we were pulling his teeth.
> >
> > I need your review of those. I will rediff as soon as rc1 is out to send
> > something that can be put into -next. Please tell me until then if the
> > approach is ok. I dont think we can do anything in the merge window.
>
> The patch looked OK. Have you tested it, such as using a this_cpu op on a
> PREEMPT=y kernel in a preemptible section? That should trigger the preempt
> warning.
The reason that certain __this_cpu ops were converted to raw_cpu ops is
because they triggered the preemption check. The test was done in a kvm
environment (as evident from the description).
--
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