[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231027192323.GH26550@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 21:23:23 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@....com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>,
"Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] rcu: Fix PF_IDLE related issues v3
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 04:40:46PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Frederic Weisbecker (4):
> rcu: Introduce rcu_cpu_online()
> rcu/tasks: Handle new PF_IDLE semantics
> rcu/tasks-trace: Handle new PF_IDLE semantics
> sched: Exclude CPU boot code from PF_IDLE area
Aside of that pre-existing ->on_rq usage I can't see anything wrong with
this.
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists