Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755324Ab3JIO4b (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:56:31 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com ([209.85.212.170]:42919 "EHLO mail-wi0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753250Ab3JIO4a (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:56:30 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 16:56:19 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Thoughts on this RCU idle entry/exit patch? Message-ID: <20131009145614.GA20828@localhost.localdomain> References: <20131007153955.GA30925@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20131008203427.GE8392@localhost.localdomain> <20131008211218.GV5790@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131008211218.GV5790@linux.vnet.ibm.com> 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: 1636 Lines: 33 On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:12:18PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 10:34:28PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > So I wonder, do we want to continue to allow this nesting? I remember that DYNTICK_TASK_NEST_* > > stuff is there to protects against non finishing interrupts on some archs (I also remember that > > this, or at least a practical scenario for this, was hard to really define though :o) > > But then wouldn't it involve other kind of scenario like this? > > > > rcu_irq_enter() > > rcu_eqs_enter() > > rcu_eqs_exit() > > ... > > > > Anyway, that's just random thougths on further simplifications, in any case, this > > patch looks good. > > Yep, if no task-level nesting is ever required, things could be a bit > simpler. I would be a bit slow about making such a change, though. > After all, the need to deal with Hotel California interrupts means that > handling nesting isn't that big of a deal comparatively. ;-) Right, well ideally it would be even best to fix the corner case(s) if there aren't that many of them. I mean calling rcu_irq_exit() from the end of those half interrupts I guess. It would make it much simpler than this complicated nesting handled on the core code. But I agree there is a bit of unknown out there, so yeah lets be prudent :) > May I add your Reviewed-by? Sure, thanks! -- 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/