Re: [PATCH 0/4] RCU: various merge candidates

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:46:42 +0530
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> srcu (sleepable rcu) patches independent of the core RCU implementation
> changes in the patchset. You can queue these up either before
> or after srcu.
> 
> ...
>
> rcutorture fix patches independent of rcu implementation changes
> in this patchset.

So this patchset is largely orthogonal to the presently-queued stuff?
 
> > 
> > Now what?
> 
> Heh. I can always re-submit against -mm after I wait for a day or two
> for comments :)

That would be good, thanks.  We were seriously considering merging all the
SRCU stuff for 2.6.18, because
cpufreq-make-the-transition_notifier-chain-use-srcu.patch fixes a cpufreq
down()-in-irq-disabled warning at suspend time.

But that's a lot of new stuff just to fix a warning about something which
won't actually cause any misbehaviour.  We could just as well do

	if (irqs_disabled())
		down_read_trylock(...);	/* suspend */
	else
		down_read(...);

in cpufreq to temporarily shut the thing up.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/