From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A0EC433FE for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 01:52:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232135AbiKVBwN (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:52:13 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52946 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231978AbiKVBwH (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:52:07 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7028E2225; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:52:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71A1CB8190A; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 01:52:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C694C43470; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 01:52:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1669081923; bh=DJGYx9EZbvMPd63erzhkQ7/znuplLOsu/ELX137ez+Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=GxfIIkFMJTOmXEhvkEfsEIMmPjQAWiuj+OVeiY8Q5+6bovw5ogHhjKmcrNa07pWKI yTUh61QcjHNoJYy0+mNww3Wu6QFjFi6rdNEcwRVdnAu942cP5GGNLdM0sdpJxoODqi rVtgZUjg/E3RRYzCW9vy004gOpAbEkday5ZOxMuHUCg14LlfB3yl77b+rIFeuWji4Z fCjBC4cdsewtrEOajhkNiSagGi7ZQKYaVfQvMWgJeMi98fIv77cFp6qRy/odBvQIQD WJUpGLxtu0x8YVjaCx7AQB1OKAleD98xRW1CGVRL8wQL+VarrdIlhBMv9G3nAyqdKn Um/eWpDZVQelw== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D497E5C0641; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:52:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:52:02 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Tejun Heo Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, Uladzislau Rezki , Joel Fernandes , Lai Jiangshan Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 rcu 13/16] workqueue: Make queue_rcu_work() use call_rcu_flush() Message-ID: <20221122015202.GC4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <20221122010408.GA3799268@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> <20221122010421.3799681-13-paulmck@kernel.org> <20221122012357.GV4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 03:37:56PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:23:57PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 03:09:29PM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:04:18PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > And another call_rcu() instance that cannot be lazy is the one > > > > in queue_rcu_work(), given that callers to queue_rcu_work() are > > > > not necessarily OK with long delays. > > > > > > So, this is fine but another thing we can do is propagating the distinction > > > through the workqueue interface so that the the choice can be made by > > > workqueue users. Would that make sense? > > > > It might well! My thought was to wait to suggest that until we found a > > real-life case where this was needed, but I have no objection to being > > proactive here. > > Oh yeah, I'm completely fine either way too. > > > But the hard part... Thought for a good name? ;-) > > If we go with a separate interface, yeah, _flush would be confusing for > workqueue. Maybe _quick or _hurry? Hmm... it'd be nice to keep the suffix > consistent with RCU. What's the relationship with > synchronize_rcu_expedited()? Would using _expedited be confusing? I expect that _expedited() would be because this has nothing whatever to do with expedited grace periods. Maybe we should have used call_rcu_hurry()? What is in a name? ;-) Thanx, Paul