From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751456Ab1ADVTm (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:19:42 -0500 Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.139]:32776 "EHLO e9.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750994Ab1ADVTl (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:19:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:19:38 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Lai Jiangshan , Ingo Molnar , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: remove SPARSE_RCU_POINTER Message-ID: <20110104211938.GT2026@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <4D22DD95.7050308@cn.fujitsu.com> <201101041136.02514.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201101041136.02514.arnd@arndb.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 11:36:02AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 04 January 2011 09:43:01 Lai Jiangshan wrote: > > As I known, __rcu annotations do not effect the result compiled kernel. > > > > They work only when we use spare("make C=1" or "make C=2"), > > So we don't need another new switch for it since we have one > > for debugging(use spare or not). > > > > signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan > > The intention of this option was to avoid introducing an excessive > number of false positives when using sparse. > > We should only make that unconditional if we are reasonably convinced > that all the majority of warnings caused by it should actually > lead to changes in the code. I agree with Arnd here -- the changes required are extensive in many cases, and a number of subsystems are making decent progress. Thanx, Paul