From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CADBC33CAC for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 10:52:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE5E720658 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 10:52:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727585AbgBCKwF (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Feb 2020 05:52:05 -0500 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:59294 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726992AbgBCKwE (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Feb 2020 05:52:04 -0500 Received: from bigeasy by Galois.linutronix.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1iyZKd-00082i-Px; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 11:51:55 +0100 Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 11:51:55 +0100 From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: mingo@kernel.org, will@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, williams@redhat.com, bristot@redhat.com, longman@redhat.com, dave@stgolabs.net, jack@suse.com Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/7] locking: Percpu-rwsem rewrite Message-ID: <20200203105155.zg2facrg344uyfzn@linutronix.de> References: <20200131150703.194229898@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200131150703.194229898@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-01-31 16:07:03 [+0100], Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hi all, > > This is the long awaited report of the percpu-rwsem rework (sorry Juri). > > IIRC (I really have trouble keeping up momentum on this series) I've addressed > all previous comments by Oleg and Davidlohr and Waiman and hope we can stick > this in tip/locking/core for inclusion in the next merge. > > It has been cooked (thoroughly) in PREEMPT_RT, and not found wanting. I did not suck it into -RT earlier since it look like work-in-progress (based on the review). Now if you feel confident, I will suck it in. Thank you. > Any objections to me stuffing it in so we can all forget about it properly? Sebastian