[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210517163048.7zcg2435lsvg25ef@revolver>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 16:30:53 +0000
From: Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@...cle.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: RCU tests for Maple Tree
* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> [210517 11:40]:
> Hello, Liam!
>
> Apologies for my being so slow here, but just wanted to double-check my
> understanding of this code.
>
> There appear to be two tests that execute from run_check_rcu():
>
> o rcu_loop(). This appears to have RCU readers scanning the tree
> while an updater is adding a single range. (Or replacing it,
> as the case might be.)
>
> o rcu_val(). This appears to have RCU readers repeatedly reading a
> given value while an updater is adding/replacing a single range.
> The test complains if no one sees the new value.
>
> These tests appear to be the only use of threads, though perhaps the
> test harness has some way of creating threads that I missed.
>
> Are there other tests that I should be looking for?
No, those are the only ones I'm running with threads right now. I think
all RCU tests are run from check_rcu() iirc. This did yield results of
failures that had to be addressed so I'm somewhat confident that it's
actually working.
>From your wording I'm gathering I need to increase this by a lot more
test cases?
Thanks,
Liam
Powered by blists - more mailing lists