Re: [PATCH rcu/urgent 0/6] Fixes for RCU/scheduler/irq-threadstrainwreck

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:05:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 12:29 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> 
> > Peter, does #4 (protect __rcu_read_unlock() against scheduler-using
> > irq handlers) remove the need for #5 (Add irq_{enter,exit}() to
> > scheduler_ipi()) and #6 (Inform RCU of irq_exit() activity)?  My guess is
> > "no" for #5 and "yes" for #6.
> 
> More or less, we want to keep #5 for it does more than just fix RCU, but
> yeah, I _think_ #4 obsoletes the direct need for #6.

Heh.  So the lowest risk is keeping #6 for now and deciding later
whether we really need it.

							Thanx, Paul
--
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/