From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Simplifying our RCU models
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 13:06:24 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180306210624.GB3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180306090050.zslv7g37dh6a5kpz@gmail.com>
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 10:00:50AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > I.e. the new RCU namespace would be something like:
> >
> > call_rcu => rcu_call_rcu
>
> typo: rcu_call().
>
> > synchronize_rcu => rcu_wait_
>
> typo: rcu_wait().
>
> Here's the updated table:
>
> # RCU APIs:
>
> rcu_read_lock => rcu_read_lock # unchanged
> rcu_read_unlock => rcu_read_unlock # unchanged
>
> call_rcu => rcu_call
> call_rcu_bh => rcu_call_bh
> call_rcu_sched => rcu_call_sched
call_rcu_tasks => rcu_call_tasks ?
> synchronize_rcu => rcu_wait
> synchronize_rcu_bh => rcu_wait_bh
> synchronize_rcu_bh_expedited => rcu_wait_expedited_bh
> synchronize_rcu_expedited => rcu_wait_expedited
> synchronize_rcu_mult => rcu_wait_mult
The consolidation of RCU, RCU-bh, and RCU-sched would eliminate the
only use of synchronize_rcu_mult(). Should we simply remove it?
> synchronize_rcu_sched => rcu_wait_sched
> synchronize_rcu_tasks => rcu_wait_tasks
>
> get_state_synchronize_rcu => rcu_get_state
> cond_synchronize_rcu => rcu_wait_state
All of rcu_barrier, rcu_barrier_bh, rcu_barrier_sched, rcu_barrier_tasks,
and srcu_barrier remain unchanged, correct?
> # SRCU APIs:
>
> srcu_read_lock => srcu_read_lock # unchanged
> srcu_read_unlock => srcu_read_unlock # unchanged
>
> synchronize_srcu => srcu_wait
> synchronize_srcu_expedited => srcu_wait_expedited
call_srcu => srcu_call ?
And rcu_assign_pointer, rcu_access_pointer(), and rcu_dereference*()
remain unchanged, correct? I wouldn't expect RCU's list API to change,
but if we are going to change something, this would be the time...
On the other hand, the ones you list above are the ones that get used,
hence the ones for which the names are most important. That said...
The following list is a bit out of date, but is not too far off:
https://lwn.net/Articles/609973/
Yeah, I know, causing trouble for myself. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-06 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAG48ez17vOL0oEWqoqdHCjqfGVX+aPhHBrtgCfn35z6jZ=8-Xg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CA+55aFzQPQw2UqQ2EEGN1Xe7=qDs-2VTvHVi7SSqGNwqNRg0cQ@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAOS58YPzLeiZnwEeN31wWMZhki0t9+3ozdRNv9DgxWKY7OKmGA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CA+55aFx48U4W5tUgqW9ioZOHibPhQoDCUDWF_d-7yNCbqFQ7zg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20180305001600.GO3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <CA+55aFyOi1XnSqHtg=VfcUiBL+egNL==NRX1Zaeihe8W5OJVgw@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20180305030949.GP3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <20180305082441.4hao2z4dqn2n5on6@gmail.com>
2018-03-05 14:33 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-03-05 16:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-06 8:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-03-06 9:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-03-06 21:06 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-03-06 20:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-07 15:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-07 18:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-08 20:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-10 23:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-06-08 16:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-06-27 22:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-08-29 21:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-08 21:19 ` Andrea Parri
[not found] ` <20180309005145.GZ3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <20180309095520.GA5079@andrea>
[not found] ` <20180310160409.GF3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <20180310162946.GA7548@andrea>
[not found] ` <20180310224726.GI3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2018-03-10 23:36 ` Andrea Parri
2018-03-09 9:48 ` Lai Jiangshan
2018-03-10 16:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180306210624.GB3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®