Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:05:47 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc:     Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
        jiangshanlai@gmail.com, josh@joshtriplett.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@lge.com,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>, luto@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] rcu: Remove ->dynticks_nmi_nesting from struct
 rcu_dynticks
Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
References: <1529484440-20634-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
 <1529484440-20634-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
 <20180620145814.GQ3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <CANrsvRMYc5u3L53nnnGC6p-QcjBTfLPjkJGZyubGWAPauc-W8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180620164902.GW3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <CANrsvRPAWv8LgSvPrGgLiXnjrtK3CmpJgdpNsuu-0LZJTYeYWQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180620174037.GZ3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20180621063949.GA28024@X58A-UD3R>
 <20180621100830.GC28024@X58A-UD3R>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180621100830.GC28024@X58A-UD3R>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Message-Id: <20180621150547.GF3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 07:08:30PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 03:39:49PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > I applied what you suggested and re-named rcu_nmi_{enter,exit} to
>                                                ^
>                         rcu_nmi_{enter,exit}_common(bool irq)
> 
> > rcu_irq_{enter,exit} and applied the same re-naming to
>           ^
>      rcu_irq_{enter,exit}_common(bool nmi)
> 
> > ->dynticks_nmi_nesting as well, since those are not things to do with
>            ^
>     dynticks_nmi_nesting -> dynticks_irq_nesting
> 
> > nmi anymore but both irq and nmi.
> > 
> > I think "irq" is better to represent both irq and nmi than "nmi".
> > Please let me know if you don't think so. I can get rid of the re-
> > naming from the patch.

Again, we need to keep "nmi".  There is a lot of irq-safe code in the
Linux kernel, but not so much nmi-safe code, so we need to give the
reader as many hints as we can that this code is unusual.

							Thanx, Paul