mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] rcu: use simple wait queues where possible in rcutree
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:14:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5625E9E1.1020200@monom.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151019233157.GD5105@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Hi Paul,

On 10/20/2015 01:31 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 09:43:21AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
>> @@ -4178,7 +4178,8 @@ static void __init rcu_init_one(struct rcu_state *rsp,
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>
>> -	init_waitqueue_head(&rsp->gp_wq);
>> +	rsp->rda = rda;
> 
> This is initialized at compile time in current mainline, so the above
> statement is not needed.

I accidentally forward ported this from 3.10.

> But now that you mention it, the second parameter to rcu_init_one() is
> a bit pointless these days.  I have queued a patch eliminating it,
> which should not conflict with our patch.

Glad I can help :)

I am about to send an updated version of this series containing which
swaps this patch with #4 to avoid lockdep warning while doing bissect.
Obviously, the above statement will be gone as well.

cheers,
daniel

  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-20  7:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-10-14  7:43 [PATCH v2 0/4] Simple wait queue support Daniel Wagner
2015-10-14  7:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation Daniel Wagner
2015-10-14  7:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] KVM: use simple waitqueue for vcpu->wq Daniel Wagner
2015-10-14 14:54   ` Daniel Wagner
2015-10-14  7:43 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] rcu: use simple wait queues where possible in rcutree Daniel Wagner
2015-10-19 23:31   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-20  7:14     ` Daniel Wagner [this message]
2015-10-14  7:43 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] rcu: Do not call swake_up_all with rnp->lock holding Daniel Wagner

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=5625E9E1.1020200@monom.org \
    --to=wagi@monom.org \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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
Powered by JetHome