[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210312122647.GC3646@lothringen>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 13:26:47 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: paulmck@...nel.org
Cc: rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...com, mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.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,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, joel@...lfernandes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/3] rcu: Provide polling interfaces for
Tree RCU grace periods
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 04:26:30PM -0800, paulmck@...nel.org wrote:
> /**
> + * start_poll_state_synchronize_rcu - Snapshot and start RCU grace period
> + *
> + * Returns a cookie that is used by a later call to cond_synchronize_rcu()
> + * or poll_state_synchronize_rcu() to determine whether or not a full
> + * grace period has elapsed in the meantime. If the needed grace period
> + * is not already slated to start, notifies RCU core of the need for that
> + * grace period.
> + *
> + * Interrupts must be enabled for the case where it is necessary to awaken
> + * the grace-period kthread.
> + */
> +unsigned long start_poll_synchronize_rcu(void)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> + unsigned long gp_seq = get_state_synchronize_rcu();
Ah! It's using rcu_seq_snap() and not rcu_seq_current() and therefore it's
waiting for a safe future grace period, right?
If so, please discard my previous email.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists