Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:19:44 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/6] rcu: fix synchronize_rcu_expedited(), update docs, improve perf |
| |
* Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:21:55AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > This patchset contains a bug fix, a performance improvement, and > > > documentation updates: > > > > > > o Update Documentation/RCU/trace.txt to reflect recent changes > > > (including the removal of rcupreempt.c). > > > > i've applied this to the .33 queue. > > I realize this only represents a documentation change, but it updates > the documentation to match the code in 2.6.32, which seems worth > doing. > > > > o Add the new rnp->blocked_tasks field to the rcuhier trace file > > > in debugfs. > > > > > > o Update the Documentation/RCU/trace.txt documentation to include > > > the rnp->blocked_tasks tracing. > > > > i've applied these to the .33 queue as well. (both tracing and > > documentation is not urgent material.) I also did minor edits to the > > changelogs. > > Those who debug RCU-related issues would disagree that having adequate > tracing information proves non-urgent. :) The tracing information this > adds proves essential for debugging issues with the new hierarchical > RCU. (And the documentation patch just documents the added tracing > information, so both should go together as a unit; actually, perhaps > they should get merged.)
No, we generally dont do such changes so late in -rc's (these would hit upstream in -rc6 - which is too late).
People doing development will use the latest RCU tree so the practical impact is small. Furthermore, we had a higher than usual rate of post-rc1 RCU changes in this cycle already, it needs to cool down a bit.
Ingo
| |