Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 6 Sep 2013 09:58:31 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] rcu: Is it safe to enter an RCU read-side critical section? |
| |
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 12:52:38PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 6 Sep 2013 18:40:18 +0200 > Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I can't use plain preempt_disable() in function tracing. > > > > > > Also, since it's a misnomer to say the cpu is idle in NO_HZ_FULL when > > > we are coming from userspace, can we rename that? > > > > > > Perhaps we can also have a __rcu_is_cpu_tracking() (or whatever), with > > > the "__" appended that does not do the preempt disable. > > > > rcu_is_cpu_eqs() is probably better. It refers to other related "eqs" naming > > in RCU APIs. > > But that will just confuse the heck out of people. When I see "eqs" I > equate that with "equals". What does the rcu cpu equal?
The acronym eqs "equals" "extended quiescent state". ;-)
Thanx, Paul
| |