From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] Remove some notrace RCU APIs
Date: Sat, 25 May 2019 08:50:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190525155035.GE28207@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190525141954.GA176647@google.com>
On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 10:19:54AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 07:08:26AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 May 2019 04:14:44 -0400
> > Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > I guess the difference between the _raw_notrace and just _raw variants
> > > > is that _notrace ones do a rcu_check_sparse(). Don't we want to keep
> > > > that check?
> > >
> > > This is true.
> > >
> > > Since the users of _raw_notrace are very few, is it worth keeping this API
> > > just for sparse checking? The API naming is also confusing. I was expecting
> > > _raw_notrace to do fewer checks than _raw, instead of more. Honestly, I just
> > > want to nuke _raw_notrace as done in this series and later we can introduce a
> > > sparse checking version of _raw if need-be. The other option could be to
> > > always do sparse checking for _raw however that used to be the case and got
> > > changed in http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-afs/2016-July/001016.html
> >
> > What if we just rename _raw to _raw_nocheck, and _raw_notrace to _raw ?
>
> That would also mean changing 160 usages of _raw to _raw_nocheck in the
> kernel :-/.
>
> The tracing usage of _raw_notrace is only like 2 or 3 users. Can we just call
> rcu_check_sparse directly in the calling code for those and eliminate the APIs?
>
> I wonder what Paul thinks about the matter as well.
My thought is that it is likely that a goodly number of the current uses
of _raw should really be some form of _check, with lockdep expressions
spelled out. Not that working out what exactly those lockdep expressions
should be is necessarily a trivial undertaking. ;-)
That aside, if we are going to change the name of an API that is
used 160 places throughout the tree, we would need to have a pretty
good justification. Without such a justification, it will just look
like pointless churn to the various developers and maintainers on the
receiving end of the patches.
Thanx, Paul
> thanks, Steven!
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-25 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-24 23:49 [PATCH RFC 0/5] Remove some notrace RCU APIs Joel Fernandes (Google)
2019-05-24 23:49 ` [PATCH RFC 1/5] powerpc: Use regular rcu_dereference_raw API Joel Fernandes (Google)
2019-05-24 23:49 ` [PATCH RFC 2/5] trace: " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2019-05-24 23:49 ` [PATCH RFC 3/5] hashtable: Use the regular hlist_for_each_entry_rcu API Joel Fernandes (Google)
2019-05-24 23:49 ` [PATCH RFC 4/5] rculist: Remove hlist_for_each_entry_rcu_notrace since no users Joel Fernandes (Google)
2019-05-26 16:20 ` Miguel Ojeda
2019-05-24 23:49 ` [PATCH RFC 5/5] rcu: Remove rcu_dereference_raw_notrace " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2019-05-25 3:24 ` [PATCH RFC 0/5] Remove some notrace RCU APIs Steven Rostedt
2019-05-25 8:14 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-05-25 11:08 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-05-25 14:19 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-05-25 15:50 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2019-05-25 18:14 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-05-25 18:18 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-05-28 12:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-05-28 19:00 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-05-28 20:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190525155035.GE28207@linux.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).