Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <1a25723e-a7ad-a9f6-bd9f-278b1248d822@joelfernandes.org>
Date:   Thu, 1 Sep 2022 12:11:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.2.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/14] Implement call_rcu_lazy() and miscellaneous
 fixes
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc:     Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rushikesh S Kadam <rushikesh.s.kadam@intel.com>,
        Neeraj upadhyay <neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>,
        Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
References: <CAEXW_YS593n8Gget+REaD-c8vT8Ht_AzOY0kXA_uc674LOyvVw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220829204202.GQ6159@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
 <20220830105324.GA71266@lothringen>
 <20220830114343.GS6159@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
 <20220830160316.GC71266@lothringen> <20220830162244.GA73392@lothringen>
 <Yw4+g/0yEf7fpHrh@pc636> <20220901112947.GA105556@lothringen>
 <YxCejoKH8dGIeW22@pc636> <20220901144158.GV6159@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
 <20220901153034.GA106955@lothringen>
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220901153034.GA106955@lothringen>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 9/1/2022 11:30 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> So I'm not entirely comfortable but I'm going to review the current patchset
> anyway and once it lands -rcu I'll try to hack a quick !NOCB implementation
> for measurements purpose.

Sounds good, arguable the core implementation to use bypass list is not too
complex or anything, and maybe you can generalize the bypass list for !NONCB as
well and re-use most of the code. You will need a per-cpu list anyway (bypass or
some other) to queue the CBs. In v1, we had a separate per-cpu list.

Thanks for offering to review the patches, you guys really motivate me to work
on it (I am currently on leave but still working on it). I'll be looking forward
to getting that out soon. Yesterday was good progress.

 - Joel