Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753493Ab3IINtZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Sep 2013 09:49:25 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f177.google.com ([74.125.82.177]:43326 "EHLO mail-we0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752062Ab3IINtY (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Sep 2013 09:49:24 -0400 Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 15:49:21 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Peter Zijlstra , "Paul E. McKenney" , Eric Dumazet , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, sbw@mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: Is it safe to enter an RCU read-side critical section? Message-ID: <20130909134919.GG16280@somewhere> References: <20130906174117.GU3966@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130906185927.GE2706@somewhere> <20130909105347.GK31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130909121329.GA16280@somewhere> <20130909083926.3eceebef@gandalf.local.home> <20130909124547.GB16280@somewhere> <20130909085504.2ddd7e69@gandalf.local.home> <20130909131452.GA31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130909132900.GE16280@somewhere> <20130909094132.74f1dd57@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130909094132.74f1dd57@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 958 Lines: 30 On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:41:32AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 15:29:02 +0200 > Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > No, putting that on the task_struct won't help much in this regard I think. > > Regular schedule() calls don't change that per cpu state. > > But is there a place that it would need to? I don't have any in mind. > > I mean, if RCU is not tracking a CPU, is it safe to call schedule(). Nope, a CPU is not allowed to call schedule() if RCU is not tracking it. > And then how would the new task know that RCU is ignoring that CPU? On return from schedule(), it's (supposed to be) guaranteed that the CPU is always tracked by RCU. > > -- Steve > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/