linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] rcu: Change return type of rcu_spawn_one_boost

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: <20190630193834.GU26519@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Sun, 30 Jun 2019 12:38:34 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, josh@...htriplett.org,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        jiangshanlai@...il.com, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rcu: Change return type of
 rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread()

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:43:39AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 01:57:03PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 09:42:40AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 04:07:46PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > I tested if the WARN_ON_ONCE() is fired with my box and it was ok.
> > > 
> > > Looks pretty safe to me and nice clean up!
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> > 
> > Agreed, but I still cannot find where this applies.  I did try rcu/next,
> > which is currently here:
> > 
> > commit b989ff070574ad8b8621d866de0a8e9a65d42c80 (rcu/rcu/next, rcu/next)
> > Merge: 4289ee7d5a83 11ca7a9d541d
> > Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
> > Date:   Mon Jun 24 09:12:39 2019 -0700
> > 
> >     Merge LKMM and RCU commits
> > 
> > Help?
> 
> commit 204d7a60670f3f6399a4d0826667ab7863b3e429
> 
>      Merge LKMM and RCU commits
> 
> I made it on top of the above. And could you tell me which branch I'd
> better use when developing. I think it's been changing sometimes.

That would be because idiot here took so much care to avoid risking
pushing some early development commits into the upcoming merge window
that he managed to misplace them entirely.  The -rcu tree's "dev" branch
now includes them.  Could you please port to it?

a1af11a24cb0 ("rcu/nocb: Make __call_rcu_nocb_wake() safe for many callbacks")

> Thank you for the answer in advance!

And please accept my apologies for the very confusing tree layout this
time around!

							Thanx, Paul