On 09/04/2013 03:36 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:21:18AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote:
>>
>> Firstly, thank you for your reply with these details.
>>
>> On 08/26/2013 03:18 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
On
On 09/04/2013 01:59 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 01:41:03PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> Hello Maintainers:
>>
>> Is this issue finished ?
>>
>> If need additional help from me (e.g. some test things, or others, if
>> you have no time, can let me try), please let me know, I
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:21:18AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote:
>
> Firstly, thank you for your reply with these details.
>
> On 08/26/2013 03:18 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> >> On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>>
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 01:41:03PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> Hello Maintainers:
>
> Is this issue finished ?
>
> If need additional help from me (e.g. some test things, or others, if
> you have no time, can let me try), please let me know, I should try.
Ah, sorry, here is the patch.
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 01:41:03PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
Hello Maintainers:
Is this issue finished ?
If need additional help from me (e.g. some test things, or others, if
you have no time, can let me try), please let me know, I should try.
Ah, sorry, here is the patch.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:21:18AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote:
Firstly, thank you for your reply with these details.
On 08/26/2013 03:18 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Aug
On 09/04/2013 01:59 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 01:41:03PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
Hello Maintainers:
Is this issue finished ?
If need additional help from me (e.g. some test things, or others, if
you have no time, can let me try), please let me know, I should try.
On 09/04/2013 03:36 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:21:18AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote:
Firstly, thank you for your reply with these details.
On 08/26/2013 03:18 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
On 08/21/2013
Hello Maintainers:
Is this issue finished ?
If need additional help from me (e.g. some test things, or others, if
you have no time, can let me try), please let me know, I should try.
Thanks.
On 08/26/2013 10:21 AM, Chen Gang F T wrote:
>
> Firstly, thank you for your reply with these
Hello Maintainers:
Is this issue finished ?
If need additional help from me (e.g. some test things, or others, if
you have no time, can let me try), please let me know, I should try.
Thanks.
On 08/26/2013 10:21 AM, Chen Gang F T wrote:
Firstly, thank you for your reply with these details.
Firstly, thank you for your reply with these details.
On 08/26/2013 03:18 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>
> [ . . . ]
>
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
[ . . . ]
> > Don't get me wrong, I do welcome appropriate patches. In fact, if
> > you look at RCU's git history, you will
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
[ . . . ]
Don't get me wrong, I do welcome appropriate patches. In fact, if
you look at RCU's git history, you will see
Firstly, thank you for your reply with these details.
On 08/26/2013 03:18 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:01:53AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
[ . . . ]
Don't
On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>>
>> If we still doubt about it, but can not find a suitable way to fix it
>> (neither of us are familiar with it).
>
> Well, you have that halfway correct, which some might well argue is
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>
> If we still doubt about it, but can not find a suitable way to fix it
> (neither of us are familiar with it).
Well, you have that halfway correct, which some might well argue is an
upward trend from your earlier postings. I do
If we still doubt about it, but can not find a suitable way to fix it
(neither of us are familiar with it).
Is it suitable to use BUG_ON() for it (the diff may like below) ?
---diff begin---
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c
If we still doubt about it, but can not find a suitable way to fix it
(neither of us are familiar with it).
Is it suitable to use BUG_ON() for it (the diff may like below) ?
---diff begin---
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
If we still doubt about it, but can not find a suitable way to fix it
(neither of us are familiar with it).
Well, you have that halfway correct, which some might well argue is an
upward trend from your earlier postings. I do
On 08/21/2013 10:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 01:59:29PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
If we still doubt about it, but can not find a suitable way to fix it
(neither of us are familiar with it).
Well, you have that halfway correct, which some might well argue is an
On 08/20/2013 12:43 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 08/20/2013 12:18 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:51:23AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
>>> "irdp->qlen != rdp->qlen_lazy' when 'rdp->nxtlist'
On 08/20/2013 12:18 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:51:23AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>>
>>
>> If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
>> "irdp->qlen != rdp->qlen_lazy' when 'rdp->nxtlist' existance).
>>
>> Recommend to improve the related code,
On 08/20/2013 12:10 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:50:02AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> According to the comment above rcu_cpu_has_callbacks(): "If there are
>> no callbacks, all of them are deemed to be lazy".
>>
>> So when both 'hc' and 'al' are false, '*all_lazy' should
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:51:23AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>
>
> If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
> "irdp->qlen != rdp->qlen_lazy' when 'rdp->nxtlist' existance).
>
> Recommend to improve the related code, like the diff below.
Are you sure that this
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:50:02AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> According to the comment above rcu_cpu_has_callbacks(): "If there are
> no callbacks, all of them are deemed to be lazy".
>
> So when both 'hc' and 'al' are false, '*all_lazy' should be true, not
> false.
If there are no callbacks,
If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
"irdp->qlen != rdp->qlen_lazy' when 'rdp->nxtlist' existance).
Recommend to improve the related code, like the diff below.
--diff begin
diff --git
According to the comment above rcu_cpu_has_callbacks(): "If there are
no callbacks, all of them are deemed to be lazy".
So when both 'hc' and 'al' are false, '*all_lazy' should be true, not
false.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang
---
kernel/rcutree.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1
According to the comment above rcu_cpu_has_callbacks(): If there are
no callbacks, all of them are deemed to be lazy.
So when both 'hc' and 'al' are false, '*all_lazy' should be true, not
false.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang gang.c...@asianux.com
---
kernel/rcutree.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1
If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
irdp-qlen != rdp-qlen_lazy' when 'rdp-nxtlist' existance).
Recommend to improve the related code, like the diff below.
--diff begin
diff --git
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:50:02AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
According to the comment above rcu_cpu_has_callbacks(): If there are
no callbacks, all of them are deemed to be lazy.
So when both 'hc' and 'al' are false, '*all_lazy' should be true, not
false.
If there are no callbacks, what must
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:51:23AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
irdp-qlen != rdp-qlen_lazy' when 'rdp-nxtlist' existance).
Recommend to improve the related code, like the diff below.
Are you sure that this represents an
On 08/20/2013 12:10 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:50:02AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
According to the comment above rcu_cpu_has_callbacks(): If there are
no callbacks, all of them are deemed to be lazy.
So when both 'hc' and 'al' are false, '*all_lazy' should be true,
On 08/20/2013 12:18 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:51:23AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
irdp-qlen != rdp-qlen_lazy' when 'rdp-nxtlist' existance).
Recommend to improve the related code, like the diff
On 08/20/2013 12:43 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
On 08/20/2013 12:18 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:51:23AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
If 'hc' is false, 'al' will never be false, either (only need check
irdp-qlen != rdp-qlen_lazy' when 'rdp-nxtlist' existance).
Recommend to
34 matches
Mail list logo
