cu_tasks(). synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() can also
promise
that all preempted tasks have scheduled, but it will not wait
tasks_rcu_exit_srcu.
Signed-off-by: Chen Zhongjin
---
arch/Kconfig | 2 +-
kernel/kprobes.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconf
cu_tasks(). synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() can also
promise
that all preempted tasks have scheduled, but it will not wait
tasks_rcu_exit_srcu.
Signed-off-by: Chen Zhongjin
---
arch/Kconfig | 2 +-
kernel/kprobes.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconf
cu_tasks(). synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() can also
promise
that all preempted tasks have scheduled, but it will not wait
tasks_rcu_exit_srcu.
Fixes: a30b85df7d59 ("kprobes: Use synchronize_rcu_tasks() for optprobe with
CONFIG_PREEMPT=y")
Signed-off-by: Chen Zhongjin
---
v1 -> v2: Add Fixes tag
---
ee to look here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MEHHs5qbbZBzhN8dGP17pt-d87WptFJ2ZQcqS221d9I/edit?usp=sharing
And please see below for a prototype patch, which passes moderate
rcutorture testing.
Chen Zhongjin, does this prevent the deadlo
On 2024/2/1 21:47, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 06:09:05PM +0800, Chen Zhongjin wrote:
On 2024/1/20 23:30, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> (Apologies for the delay, despite my attempts to make it otherwise,
your email still got dumped into my spam folder.)
Sorry for t
On 2024/9/12 0:20, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
...
Do not get me wrong. I do not expect that the upstream variant would
be feature complete from the beginning. I just want to get a picture
how far it is. The code will be maintained only when it would have
users. And it would have users only when it
6 matches
Mail list logo
