[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160224050021.GA14616@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:00:21 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
dvhart@...ux.intel.com, fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
bobby.prani@...il.com
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/14] Documentation updates for 4.6
Hello!
This series contains documentation updates as follows:
1. Update the requirements design-level documentation to record RCU's
responsibility to avoid injecting OS jitter onto nohz_full CPUs.
2. Fix control-dependency summary of memory-barriers.txt to
note that barrier() does not always prevent code reordering
when both legs of an "if" statement begin with identical code.
3. Fix memory-barriers.txt section references.
4. Update the requirements design-level documentation to add
synchronize_rcu_mult().
5. Remove obsolete references to RCU-protected array indexes from
memory-barriers.txt.
6. Update memory-barriers.txt to explicitly state that
rcu_dereference() orders writes to as well as reads from
the RCU-protected data item.
7. Update memory-barriers.txt to distinguish between local and
global transitivity.
8. Update memory-barriers.txt to add alternative outcome from
release-acquire chain.
9. Add design-level documentation for RCU's major data structures.
10. Update the requirements design-level documentation to explain
why rcu_read_lock() needs no barrier() for PREEMPT=n.
11. Remove misleading statement that transitivity is cumulativity
from memory-barriers.txt.
12. Update the requirements design-level documentation to explicitly
state that it is illegal to invoke call_rcu() from an offline CPU.
13. Add text to the design-level documentation for RCU's major data
structures stating how the combining tree keeps lock contention
under control.
14. Clarify compiler store-fusion example in memory-barriers.txt.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/BigTreeClassicRCU.svg | 474 ++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/BigTreeClassicRCUBH.svg | 499 ++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/BigTreeClassicRCUBHdyntick.svg | 695 +++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/BigTreePreemptRCUBHdyntick.svg | 741 ++++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/BigTreePreemptRCUBHdyntickCB.svg | 858 +++++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/Data-Structures.html | 1395 ++++++++++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/Data-Structures.htmlx | 1295 +++++++++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/HugeTreeClassicRCU.svg | 939 ++++++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/TreeLevel.svg | 828 +++++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/TreeMapping.svg | 305 ++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/TreeMappingLevel.svg | 380 +++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/blkd_task.svg | 843 +++++++
RCU/Design/Data-Structures/nxtlist.svg | 396 +++
RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html | 235 +-
RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx | 121 +
memory-barriers.txt | 141 -
16 files changed, 10074 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists