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;
From:   "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: [PATCH rcu/next 0/3] Preparatory patches borrowed from lazy rcu v5
Date:   Thu, 15 Sep 2022 00:14:16 +0000
Message-Id: <20220915001419.55617-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

Just sending a few patches before lazy rcu v6 can come out. That can come out
after more testing to check feasibility of ideas discussed at LPC. I will try
to get rcutop pushed as well before v6, but in the meanwhile I don't see much
reason to block these few patches for 6.1. These apply to Paul's rcu/next
branch. What do you think?

Joel Fernandes (Google) (3):
rcu/tree: Use READ_ONCE() for lockless read of rnp->qsmask
rcu: Move trace_rcu_callback() before bypassing
rcu: Fix late wakeup when flush of bypass cblist happens

kernel/rcu/tree.c      | 12 +++++++-----
kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h | 10 ++++++++--
2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

--
2.37.2.789.g6183377224-goog