Alexis Lothoré <[email protected]> writes:
> On 2/19/24 17:19, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
>> Alexis Lothoré <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> This small series aims to fix multiple warnings observed when enabling
>>> CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST:
>>> - add missing locks to create corresponding critical read sections
>>> - fix mix between RCU and SRCU API usage
>>>
>>> While at it, since SRCU API is already in use in the driver, any fix done
>>> on RCU usage was also done with the SRCU variant of RCU API. I do not
>>> really get why we are using SRCU in this driver instead of classic RCU, as
>>> it seems to be done in any other wireless driver.
>>
>> And even more so, no other driver in drivers/net use SRCU.
>>
>>> My understanding is that primary SRCU use case is for compatibility
>>> with realtime kernel, which needs to be preemptible everywhere. Has
>>> the driver been really developped with this constraint in mind ? If
>>> you have more details about this, feel free to educate me.
>>
>> Alexis, if you have the time I recommend submitting a patchset
>> converting wilc1000 to use classic RCU. At least I have a hard time
>> understanding why SRCU is needed, especially after seeing the warning
>> you found.
>
> If nobody else comes in with a strong argument in favor of keeping
> SRCU
And emphasis on the word "strong"...
> yes I can certainly add that to my backlog :)
Thanks! Your wilc1000 backlog is getting long, I hope your todo software
won't overload ;)
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches