Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-171460-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 15:48:18 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 18/27] rcu: Rename rcu_dynticks_in_eqs_since() into
 rcu_watching_changed_since()
Message-ID: <ZjoxIhtCw4Pov0VH@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20240430091740.1826862-1-vschneid@redhat.com>
 <20240430091740.1826862-19-vschneid@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20240430091740.1826862-19-vschneid@redhat.com>

Le Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:17:22AM +0200, Valentin Schneider a ?crit :
> The context_tracking.state RCU_DYNTICKS subvariable has been renamed to
> RCU_WATCHING, the dynticks prefix can go.
> 
> Furthermore, the "in_eqs_since" part confuses me, as IIUC this only checks
> for a change in watching/eqs state, not that RCU transitionned *into* a
> EQS after the snapshot was taken.
> 
> e.g. if
>   snap = 0b1000 (EQS)
> and the following rcu_watching_snap(CPU) is:
> 	 0b1100 (watching)
> then
>   rcu_watching_in_eqs_since(rdp, snap) -> true
> 
> but because RCU was already in EQS at the time of the
> snap - it hasn't entered EQS "since" the snap was taken.
> 
> Update the name to reflect that we're only looking at watching/EQS
> transitions, not specifically transitions into EQS.

Indeed in practice the function only checks a change. But semantically it really
checks a trip to eqs because this function is only ever called after a failing
call to rcu_dynticks_in_eqs().

So not sure about that one rename. Paul?