Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:40:58 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/4] RCU: various merge candidates |
| |
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:46:42 +0530 Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com> wrote:
> srcu (sleepable rcu) patches independent of the core RCU implementation > changes in the patchset. You can queue these up either before > or after srcu. > > ... > > rcutorture fix patches independent of rcu implementation changes > in this patchset.
So this patchset is largely orthogonal to the presently-queued stuff?
> > > > Now what? > > Heh. I can always re-submit against -mm after I wait for a day or two > for comments :)
That would be good, thanks. We were seriously considering merging all the SRCU stuff for 2.6.18, because cpufreq-make-the-transition_notifier-chain-use-srcu.patch fixes a cpufreq down()-in-irq-disabled warning at suspend time.
But that's a lot of new stuff just to fix a warning about something which won't actually cause any misbehaviour. We could just as well do
if (irqs_disabled()) down_read_trylock(...); /* suspend */ else down_read(...);
in cpufreq to temporarily shut the thing up.
- 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/
| |