On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:24:30PM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
quoted text > Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> Hmmm... Looks like rcu_pending is also always called with its cpu
>> parameter set to the current CPU, and same for rcu_needs_cpu().
>> And given that all the external uses of rcu_check_callbacks() are
>> of the following form:
>>
>> if (rcu_pending(cpu))
>> rcu_check_callbacks(cpu, whatever);
>>
>>
>> perhaps rcu_pending() should be an internal-to-RCU API invoked from
>> rcu_check_callbacks().
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
> From my point of view: Yes, change it.
>
> In the long run, I'd like to move the stall detector code to rcupdate.c,
> with an 'rcu_cpu_missing' callback. That one would need a cpu flag, but
> that's a new function.
Agreed. Perhaps a good change to make while introducing stall detection
to preemptable RCU -- there would then be three examples, which should
allow good generalization.
Thanx, Paul
--
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH, RFC] v7 scalable classic RCU implementation , Paul E. McKenney , (Mon Oct 27, 9:45 am)