On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 10:23:57AM +0000, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> "rcu_wait" is incorrct here, use "rcu_run" instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan...@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <la...@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 278798e58698..c351fc280945 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -2485,7 +2485,7 @@ static void rcu_cpu_kthread(unsigned int cpu)
> int spincnt;
>
> for (spincnt = 0; spincnt < 10; spincnt++) {
> - trace_rcu_utilization(TPS("Start CPU kthread@rcu_wait"));
> + trace_rcu_utilization(TPS("Start CPU kthread@rcu_run"));
> local_bh_disable();
> *statusp = RCU_KTHREAD_RUNNING;
> local_irq_disable();
> @@ -2496,7 +2496,7 @@ static void rcu_cpu_kthread(unsigned int cpu)
> rcu_core();
> local_bh_enable();
> if (*workp == 0) {
> - trace_rcu_utilization(TPS("End CPU kthread@rcu_wait"));
> + trace_rcu_utilization(TPS("End CPU kthread@rcu_run"));
This one needs to stay as it was because this is where we wait when out
of work.
So I took the first hunk and dropped this second hunk.
Please let me know if I am missing something.
Thanx, Paul
> *statusp = RCU_KTHREAD_WAITING;
> return;
> }
> --
> 2.20.1
>
