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;
Cc:     paulmck@kernel.org, joel@joelfernandes.org, corbet@lwn.net,
        tranmanphong@gmail.com, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH] Documentation: RCU: NMI-RCU:
 Converted NMI-RCU.txt to NMI-RCU.rst.
To:     madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com
References: <20191028214252.17580-1-madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com>
From:   Phong Tran <tranmanphong@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5bab8828-76e4-c67f-5855-ea4e4f43eaa5@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Nov 2019 20:40:05 +0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20191028214252.17580-1-madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 10/29/19 4:42 AM, madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com>
> 
> This patch converts NMI-RCU from txt to rst format.
> Also adds NMI-RCU in the index.rst file.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com>
> -- >   .../RCU/{NMI-RCU.txt => NMI-RCU.rst}          | 53 ++++++++++---------
>   Documentation/RCU/index.rst                   |  1 +
>   2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>   rename Documentation/RCU/{NMI-RCU.txt => NMI-RCU.rst} (73%)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/NMI-RCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/NMI-RCU.rst
> similarity index 73%
> rename from Documentation/RCU/NMI-RCU.txt
> rename to Documentation/RCU/NMI-RCU.rst
> index 881353fd5bff..da5861f6a433 100644
> --- a/Documentation/RCU/NMI-RCU.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/RCU/NMI-RCU.rst
> @@ -1,4 +1,7 @@
> +.. _NMI_rcu_doc:
> +
>   Using RCU to Protect Dynamic NMI Handlers
> +=========================================
>   
>   
>   Although RCU is usually used to protect read-mostly data structures,
> @@ -9,7 +12,7 @@ work in "arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_timer_int.c" and in
>   "arch/x86/kernel/traps.c".
>   
>   The relevant pieces of code are listed below, each followed by a
> -brief explanation.
> +brief explanation.::
>   
there is just a minor ":" redundant in html page.There are some same in 
this patch.
eg:
  brief explanation.:

Other things look good to me.

Tested-by: Phong Tran <tranmanphong@gmail.com>

Regards,
Phong.

>   	static int dummy_nmi_callback(struct pt_regs *regs, int cpu)
>   	{
> @@ -18,12 +21,12 @@ brief explanation.
>   
>   The dummy_nmi_callback() function is a "dummy" NMI handler that does
>   nothing, but returns zero, thus saying that it did nothing, allowing
> -the NMI handler to take the default machine-specific action.
> +the NMI handler to take the default machine-specific action.::
>   
>   	static nmi_callback_t nmi_callback = dummy_nmi_callback;
>   
>   This nmi_callback variable is a global function pointer to the current
> -NMI handler.
> +NMI handler.::
>   
>   	void do_nmi(struct pt_regs * regs, long error_code)
>   	{
> @@ -53,11 +56,12 @@ anyway.  However, in practice it is a good documentation aid, particularly
>   for anyone attempting to do something similar on Alpha or on systems
>   with aggressive optimizing compilers.
>   
> -Quick Quiz:  Why might the rcu_dereference_sched() be necessary on Alpha,
> -	     given that the code referenced by the pointer is read-only?
> +Quick Quiz:
> +		Why might the rcu_dereference_sched() be necessary on Alpha, given that the code referenced by the pointer is read-only?
>   
> +:ref:`Answer to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz_NMI>`
>   
> -Back to the discussion of NMI and RCU...
> +Back to the discussion of NMI and RCU...::
>   
>   	void set_nmi_callback(nmi_callback_t callback)
>   	{
> @@ -68,7 +72,7 @@ The set_nmi_callback() function registers an NMI handler.  Note that any
>   data that is to be used by the callback must be initialized up -before-
>   the call to set_nmi_callback().  On architectures that do not order
>   writes, the rcu_assign_pointer() ensures that the NMI handler sees the
> -initialized values.
> +initialized values::
>   
>   	void unset_nmi_callback(void)
>   	{
> @@ -82,7 +86,7 @@ up any data structures used by the old NMI handler until execution
>   of it completes on all other CPUs.
>   
>   One way to accomplish this is via synchronize_rcu(), perhaps as
> -follows:
> +follows::
>   
>   	unset_nmi_callback();
>   	synchronize_rcu();
> @@ -98,24 +102,23 @@ to free up the handler's data as soon as synchronize_rcu() returns.
>   Important note: for this to work, the architecture in question must
>   invoke nmi_enter() and nmi_exit() on NMI entry and exit, respectively.
>   
> +.. _answer_quick_quiz_NMI:
>   
> -Answer to Quick Quiz
> -
> -	Why might the rcu_dereference_sched() be necessary on Alpha, given
> -	that the code referenced by the pointer is read-only?
> +Answer to Quick Quiz:
> +	Why might the rcu_dereference_sched() be necessary on Alpha, given that the code referenced by the pointer is read-only?
>   
> -	Answer: The caller to set_nmi_callback() might well have
> -		initialized some data that is to be used by the new NMI
> -		handler.  In this case, the rcu_dereference_sched() would
> -		be needed, because otherwise a CPU that received an NMI
> -		just after the new handler was set might see the pointer
> -		to the new NMI handler, but the old pre-initialized
> -		version of the handler's data.
> +	The caller to set_nmi_callback() might well have
> +	initialized some data that is to be used by the new NMI
> +	handler.  In this case, the rcu_dereference_sched() would
> +	be needed, because otherwise a CPU that received an NMI
> +	just after the new handler was set might see the pointer
> +	to the new NMI handler, but the old pre-initialized
> +	version of the handler's data.
>   
> -		This same sad story can happen on other CPUs when using
> -		a compiler with aggressive pointer-value speculation
> -		optimizations.
> +	This same sad story can happen on other CPUs when using
> +	a compiler with aggressive pointer-value speculation
> +	optimizations.
>   
> -		More important, the rcu_dereference_sched() makes it
> -		clear to someone reading the code that the pointer is
> -		being protected by RCU-sched.
> +	More important, the rcu_dereference_sched() makes it
> +	clear to someone reading the code that the pointer is
> +	being protected by RCU-sched.
> diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/index.rst b/Documentation/RCU/index.rst
> index 8d20d44f8fd4..627128c230dc 100644
> --- a/Documentation/RCU/index.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/RCU/index.rst
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ RCU concepts
>      arrayRCU
>      rcu
>      listRCU
> +   NMI-RCU
>      UP
>   
>      Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering
>