Re: 3.0-git15 Atomic scheduling in pidmap_init

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 01:34:24AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 04:12:55PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Indeed, this was a bogus patch.  The version I posted on the -rcu git
> > tree a few days ago has the correct "rdp->qs_pending = 0".  I thought
> > that I had chased down all the bogus copies, but obviously not.  :-(
> 
> Ah ok.
> 
> > > Should it perhaps set it to 1 only if we have rnp->gpnum > rnp->completed ?
> > 
> > I would rather keep it simple.  If rnp->gpnum > rnp->completed, then
> > the newly onlined CPU will notice and adjust appropriately soon enough.
> 
> Ah, just to ensure I understood well is that because rcu_pending() (called
> from tick) would detect rnp->gpnum != rdp->gpnum and thus trigger the softirq
> that notes the new gpnum and toggles  qs_pending?

Yep, that is the theory, anyway.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

> > > >  			rdp->passed_quiesc_completed = rnp->completed - 1;
> > > >  		}
> > > >  		raw_spin_unlock(&rnp->lock); /* irqs already disabled. */
> --
> 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/
--
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/