From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S941256AbdAJSgr (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:36:47 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33146 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933888AbdAJSgn (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:36:43 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:35:47 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] sched: Introduce rcuwait Message-ID: <20170110183547.GB32298@redhat.com> References: <1482426096-12792-1-git-send-email-dave@stgolabs.net> <20170109182608.GA25787@linux-80c1.suse> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170109182608.GA25787@linux-80c1.suse> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:36:43 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On 01/09, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > Gents, any further thoughts on this? Both look correct to me, and I think this allows us to make more optimizations in percpu-rwsem.c. I am not sure about the naming... Yes, it relies on rcu but this is just implementation detail. But this is cosmetic and I can't suggest something better than rcuwait. Well, speaking of naming, rcuwait_trywake() doesn't look good to me, rcuwait_wake_up() looks better, "try" is misleading imo. But this is cosmetic/subjective too. Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov