Re: lots of suspicious RCU traces

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (10/24/12 13:11), Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > sorry, I meant idle from RCU point of view:
> > > > 
> > > > int rcu_is_cpu_idle(void)
> > > > {
> > > >          return !rcu_dynticks_nesting;
> > > > }
> > > 
> > > Hmmm...  This reproduces on UP builds, then?
> > 
> > I'll compile UP build (will offlining of N-1 CPUs do the trick?).
> 
> Oh -- you quoted the Tiny RCU (CONFIG_SMP=n) variant of rcu_is_cpu_idle(),

sorry, that was just an 'illustration'.

	-ss

> so I just thought that you were reproducing on CONFIG_SMP=n.  You would
> have to actually rebuild the kernel to get the different version.
> 
> But never mind!  RCU_USER_QS depends on CONFIG_SMP=y, so my question
> was irrelevant.
> 
> 							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/