Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 22/41] rcu: Simplify unboosting checks

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 06:38:47PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 11:41:40AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > This is a port of commit #82e78d80 from TREE_PREEMPT_RCU to
> > TINY_PREEMPT_RCU.
> > 
> > This commit uses the fact that current->rcu_boost_mutex is set
> > any time that the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED flag is set in the
> > current->rcu_read_unlock_special bitmask.  This allows tests of
> > the bit to be changed to tests of the pointer, which in turn allows
> > the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED flag to be eliminated.
> 
> Does this change affect rcu_read_unlock()'s logic to trigger the
> slowpath only when special flags get set?

Interestingly enough, it does not.  The only way a task can be subjected
to RCU priority boosting is for that task to block sometime in its
current RCU read-side critical section.  When the task blocks, the
RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED flag will be set.  Therefore, any time that the
current->rcu_boost_mutex pointer is non-NULL, the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED
flag will be set, so the current test of current->rcu_read_unlock_special
against zero continues to work correctly.

OK, OK, I will update the commit message with words to this effect.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/