[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200731004012.2324147-2-joel@joelfernandes.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 20:40:11 -0400
From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/3] rcu/tree: Clarify comments about FQS loop reporting quiescent states
At least since v4.19, the FQS loop no longer reports quiescent states
unless it is a dire situation where an offlined CPU failed to report
a quiescent state. Let us clarify the comment in rcu_gp_init() inorder
to keep the comment current.
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 6b6fc28bb670..a621932cc385 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -1701,8 +1701,8 @@ static bool rcu_gp_init(void)
/*
* Apply per-leaf buffered online and offline operations to the
- * rcu_node tree. Note that this new grace period need not wait
- * for subsequent online CPUs, and that quiescent-state forcing
+ * rcu_node tree. Note that this new grace period need not wait for
+ * subsequent online CPUs, and that RCU hooks in CPU offlining path
* will handle subsequent offline CPUs.
*/
rcu_state.gp_state = RCU_GP_ONOFF;
--
2.28.0.163.g6104cc2f0b6-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists