Received: by 2002:a25:f815:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id u21csp2596003ybd; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:30:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzUFxMcyqXxf+ShNDMqsvvlV57syuczBNIXZxIC5rQ1+9504r+26sFgUH+i8O24OeBK+cSS X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:2bc5:: with SMTP id l63mr7714251plb.30.1561674616673; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:30:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1561674616; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=kwFqKsMXMh08d0+aRL/K57abaH8E1acvToOhuwmEDohFpSc2yzwttcjGN0NXd3mA5v n/qm58UBsOIJYPD29n429F0pl0rV+N58/+C6qtONOpi0Qhl7nL6TsyGz92DreZQUg9d2 +gkEvB3Xam3Qsj8IO8qotU9+eGa1Rz9VUsijFrYasbX5RCHKv7auxQFMQ8plOXKZGOqv qtZeHTPUwqCRujQw/4qZtCQAH39ooxah88qEyRppjPZ2iviOrKjf1JcBBo+nDlQa/cO6 eP1nJ2mcOJC2R8ZcGR3D7b4A3Qcvht4bo4rETs4i43zm812kootlNsSgchDdUlk1tKp5 nKXg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=+KRQb67RvPGzSeTQGzcpSYjjB8im3Cc5oZ5dhnB5vzo=; b=EnEa8l017BWwqsRukZNUz/Yp1BTGV9zYlnOROxJqbISwKFn4hlAx5yu74Dosku5e5G BFp4AfMi3dJcUI5WUOADeAFDynh9walM6YaWWIPWkvLmavs/ceUgJg2b5fnyqpOQ82xE CNUP+WnyfohZbHJsjkO13gSnPB+VhjF3zDCh+5Fqdhadd8aC+wzr+oFkx2e2eMmNjOkh 860LamS+8QaMDgwnfQSOanOMVt+Ye1WZaeFK22a5qr6D61cDsWllnwhdtv07xS9F6L53 qZ9FQirIWSLEXUIPaZPnQusk68B+lXGIyzGoXdmQrn6MeClh78zSCsdcheo5BWniZe9R mYqg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g9si305593pgq.563.2019.06.27.15.29.59; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:30:16 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726697AbfF0W3m (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 18:29:42 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56722 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726445AbfF0W3l (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 18:29:41 -0400 Received: from gandalf.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D364C2063F; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 22:29:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 18:29:38 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Shuah Khan , Jiunn Chang , linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, joel@joelfernandes.org, corbet@lwn.net, rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees][PATCH] doc: RCU callback locks need only _bh, not necessarily _irq Message-ID: <20190627182938.306ab9d9@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20190627221045.GH26519@linux.ibm.com> References: <20190627210147.19510-1-c0d1n61at3@gmail.com> <20190627221045.GH26519@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:10:45 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 04:01:35PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > > On 6/27/19 3:01 PM, Jiunn Chang wrote: > > >The UP.rst file calls for locks acquired within RCU callback functions > > >to use _irq variants (spin_lock_irqsave() or similar), which does work, > > >but can be overkill. This commit therefore instead calls for _bh variants > > >(spin_lock_bh() or similar), while noting that _irq does work. > > > > > >Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > > > > Should this by Suggested-by? > > I wrote it and Jiunn converted my change to .rst, so I believe that > this is correct as is. Note, you did send Jiunn an explicit Signed-off-by when you wrote it, correct? As Signed-off-by is equivalent to a signature. -- Steve