On 10/04, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 05:41:03PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 10/04, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > >
> > > Taking a step back, why did we intend to have
> > > to wait for a new GP if another rcu_sync_exit() comes while one is still
> > > in progress?
Hi "Joel,
I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on rcu/dev]
[cannot apply to v5.4-rc1 next-20191004]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system. BTW, we also suggest to use '--base' option to specify the
ba
Hi "Joel,
I love your patch! Yet something to improve:
[auto build test ERROR on rcu/dev]
[cannot apply to v5.4-rc1 next-20191004]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system. BTW, we also suggest to use '--base' option to specify the
base tre
Hi Oleg,
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 05:41:03PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/04, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> >
> > But this is not always true if you consider the following events:
>
> I'm afraid I missed your point, but...
>
> > -->
> > GP num 11
On 10/04, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
>
> But this is not always true if you consider the following events:
I'm afraid I missed your point, but...
> -->
> GP num 11 2
> GP state ie px r
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 10:57:41AM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> From: Joel Fernandes
>
> Please consider this is an RFC for discussion only. Just want to discuss
> why the GP_REPLAY state is needed at all.
And I messed up the subject prefix, but this is *really* RFC and for
discussion
From: Joel Fernandes
Please consider this is an RFC for discussion only. Just want to discuss
why the GP_REPLAY state is needed at all.
Here's the intention AFAICS:
When rcu_sync_exit() has happened, the gp_state changes to GP_EXIT while
we wait for a grace period before transitioning to GP_IDLE
7 matches
Mail list logo