linux-kernel - Re: RCU branching for the v4.19 merge window

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180522112736.4b44ae3c@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Tue, 22 May 2018 11:27:36 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RCU branching for the v4.19 merge window

On Thu, 17 May 2018 07:40:44 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hello, Steve!
> 
> Another year, another difficult-to-branch set of RCU commits.
> 
> In happy contrast to last year, I can make some branches (SRCU, some
> of the torture commits, and a few miscellaneous commits), but I will
> likely end up with several short branches and one huge one.  My thought
> is to keep the long branch, but email the patches out in a few separate
> serieses, with each depending on its predecessor.  For example, one series
> from the big branch would be folding the ->gpnum and ->completed fields
> into a single ->gp_seq, which helps the RCU-flavor consolidation task.
> Another series suppresses some rare false-positive splats that have been
> plaguing me for more than a year.  Yet another series within this huge
> branch applies and optimizes funnel locking for grace-period startup.
> 
> The problem is that the conversion to ->gp_seq has a very large footprint,
> which of course generates lots of conflicts.  I could of course collapse
> these commits into a single commit, but if I did that I would also defer
> to the merge window following v4.19 due to the resulting loss of bisection
> within that change.
> 
> Any advice?
> 
> The commits are for-mingo..rcu/dev in my -rcu tree.

I don't see these branches (and I don't pull tags).

How bad are the conflicts? Or is it too late to respond to help (sorry,
was on vacation :-)

-- Steve