Re: linux-next: manual merge of the workqueues tree with the tip tree

[Ingo Molnar]

* Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 2019-11-18 15:08:58 [+1100], Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> Hi,
> 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the workqueues tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   kernel/workqueue.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   5a6446626d7e ("workqueue: Convert for_each_wq to use built-in list check")
> > 
> > from the tip tree and commit:
> > 
> >   49e9d1a9faf2 ("workqueue: Add RCU annotation for pwq list walk")
> > 
> > from the workqueues tree.
> 
> urgh. So the RCU warning is introduced in commit
>    28875945ba98d ("rcu: Add support for consolidated-RCU reader checking")
> 
> which was merged in v5.4-rc1. I enabled it around -rc7 and saw a few
> warnings including in the workqueue code. I asked about this and posted
> later a patch which was applied by Tejun. Now I see that the tip tree
> has a patch for this warningâ
> I would vote for the patch in -tip since it also removes the
> assert_rcu_or_wq_mutex() macro.
> It would be nice if this could be part of v5.4 since once the RCU
> warning is enabled it will yell.

So 5a6446626d7e is currently queued up for v5.5 as part of the RCU tree. 

I can cherry pick 5a6446626d7e into tip:core/urgent if Paul and Tejun 
agree.

Thanks,

	Ingo