Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:27:34 -0800 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] rcu: Clean up TASKS_RCU() abuse |
| |
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:23:04PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 04:49:40AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 01:23:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > I recently ran into TASKS_RCU() and wondered why we can't use normal > > > coding patterns to do the same. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> > > > > Well, I cannot get too excited either way, but the diffstat for this > > change is not particularly favorable. > > It also doesn't build with TASKS_RCU enabled it turns out. But the point > is, nowhere else do we use this pattern. We always provide functions.
RCU_TRACE() another very similar macro, and has been in place for quite some time. Still within RCU, admittedly, but it does exist.
Thanx, Paul
| |