lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Dec]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] srcu: Yet more detail for srcu_readers_active_idx_check() comments
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:14:48PM +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:10 PM Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:07 PM Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 9:24 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > I also did not get why you care about readers that come and ago (you
> > > > > mentioned the first reader seeing incorrect idx and the second reader
> > > > > seeing the right flipped one, etc). Those readers are irrelevant
> > > > > AFAICS since they came and went, and need not be waited on , right?.
> > > >
> > > > The comment is attempting to show (among other things) that we don't
> > > > need to care about readers that come and go more than twice during that
> > > > critical interval of time during the counter scans.
> > >
> > > Why do we need to care about readers that come and go even once? Once
> > > they are gone, they have already done an unlock() and their RSCS is
> > > over, so they need to be considered AFAICS.
> > >
> >
> > Aargh, I meant: "so they need to be considered AFAICS".
>
> Trying again: "so they need not be considered AFAICS".

Give or take counter wrap, which can make it appear that still-present
readers have finished.

> Anyway, my 1 year old son is sick so signing off for now. Thanks.

Ouch! I hope he recovers quickly and completely!!!

Thanx, Paul

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-12-15 01:12    [W:0.060 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site