Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 27 Sep 2009 08:31:08 -0700 | From | Josh Triplett <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/2] rcu: Apply review feedback from Josh Triplett, part 4 |
| |
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 11:49:51PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > These issues identified during an old-fashioned face-to-face code > review extending over many hours. This group improves an existing > abstraction and introduces two new ones. > > o Make RCU_INIT_FLAVOR() declare its own variables, removing > the need to declare them at each call site. > > o Create an rcu_for_each_leaf() macro that scans the leaf nodes > of the rcu_node tree. > > o Create an rcu_for_each_node_breadth_first() macro that does > a breadth-first traversal of the rcu_node tree, AKA stepping > through the array in index-number order. > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
I noticed one bit of unrelated code in this patch, which the commit message doesn't mention:
> --- a/kernel/rcutree.c > +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c [...] > @@ -473,18 +471,24 @@ static void print_other_cpu_stall(struct rcu_state *rsp) > return; > } > rsp->jiffies_stall = jiffies + RCU_SECONDS_TILL_STALL_RECHECK; > + > + /* > + * Now rat on any tasks that got kicked up to the root rcu_node > + * due to CPU offlining. > + */ > + rcu_print_task_stall(rnp); > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
- Josh Triplett
| |