linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH rcu 07/27] block: Remove "select SRCU"

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]

Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2023 07:48:30 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH rcu 07/27] block: Remove "select SRCU"

On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 08:36:43AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 1/5/23 8:33 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 09:05:47AM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 05:43:07PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>> On 1/4/23 5:37 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>>> Now that the SRCU Kconfig option is unconditionally selected, there is
> >>>> no longer any point in selecting it.  Therefore, remove the "select SRCU"
> >>>> Kconfig statements.
> >>>
> >>> I'm assuming something earlier made this true (only CC'ed on this patch,
> >>> not the cover letter or interesting btis...), then:
> >>
> >> I was wondering the same. But it is already unconditionally enabled
> >> since commit 0cd7e350abc4 ("rcu: Make SRCU mandatory").
> > 
> > Ah, apologies for the terseness!
> > 
> > I took the coward's way out by making CONFIG_SRCU unconditional during
> > the last merge window and removing all references during this merge
> > window.  ;-)
> 
> Are you intending for maintainers to pick up these patches, or are you
> collecting acks for sending the series separately? That part is also
> not clear :-)

Fair point!

Maintainer's choice.  By default, I collect acks and send it.  But if
(for example) this change is in a high-traffic area, the maintainer
might want to take it, in which case I drop it from my tree.

Either way works for me, as long as you let me know.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul