[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <IA1PR11MB6171450B68D3EF4000C9A4B089BF9@IA1PR11MB6171.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:17:38 +0000
From: "Zhuo, Qiuxu" <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
"paulmck@...nel.org" <paulmck@...nel.org>
CC: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
"rcu@...r.kernel.org" <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] rcu/rcuscale: Stop kfree_scale_thread thread(s) after
unloading rcuscale
> From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> [...]
> > > kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c | 7 +++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c index
> > > 91fb5905a008..5e580cd08c58 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c
> > > @@ -522,6 +522,8 @@ rcu_scale_print_module_parms(struct
> rcu_scale_ops *cur_ops, const char *tag)
> > > scale_type, tag, nrealreaders, nrealwriters, verbose,
> > > shutdown); }
> > >
> > > +static void kfree_scale_cleanup(void);
> > > +
> >
> > I do applaud minmimizing the size of the patch, but in this case could
> > you please pull the kfree_scale_cleanup() function ahead of its first use?
>
> The only trouble with moving the function like that is, the file is mostly split
> across kfree and non-kfree functions. So moving a kfree function to be
> among the non-kfree ones would look a bit weird.
Yes, this would look a bit weird ...
Please see the reply to Paul in another e-mail:
"Pull the rcu_scale_cleanup() function after kfree_scale_cleanup().
This groups kfree_* functions and groups rcu_scale_* functions.
Then the code would look cleaner."
> Perhaps a better place for the function declaration could be a new
> "rcuscale.h". But I am really Ok with Paul's suggestion as well.
>
> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Thanks for the review. :-)
> thanks,
>
> - Joel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists