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=-7.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 6BCF1C3A59F for ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 03:56:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B7A92173B for ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 03:56:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726211AbfHQD4q (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Aug 2019 23:56:46 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:45648 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725911AbfHQD4p (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Aug 2019 23:56:45 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x7H3uC4g140193 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 23:56:44 -0400 Received: from e12.ny.us.ibm.com (e12.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.202]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ue4sxqykg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 23:56:44 -0400 Received: from localhost by e12.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:56:43 +0100 Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.29) by e12.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.199) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:56:38 +0100 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x7H3ucRO50987336 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 17 Aug 2019 03:56:38 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB276B2064; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 03:56:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9440B205F; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 03:56:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.85.201.199]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 03:56:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8FDB616C1E47; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 20:56:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 20:56:37 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Joel Fernandes Cc: LKML , kernel-team , kernel-team , Byungchul Park , Davidlohr Bueso , Josh Triplett , Lai Jiangshan , Mathieu Desnoyers , Byungchul Park , Rao Shoaib , rcu , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] rcu/tree: Add basic support for kfree_rcu() batching Reply-To: paulmck@linux.ibm.com References: <20190814160411.58591-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20190816164330.GA8320@linux.ibm.com> <20190816174429.GE10481@google.com> <20190816191629.GW28441@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19081703-0060-0000-0000-0000036D4002 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00011602; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000287; SDB=6.01247944; UDB=6.00658668; IPR=6.01029458; MB=3.00028210; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2019-08-17 03:56:42 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19081703-0061-0000-0000-00004A94AE71 Message-Id: <20190817035637.GY28441@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-08-17_01:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1908170040 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 09:32:23PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 3:16 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > Hello, Joel, > > > > > > > > I reworked the commit log as follows, but was then unsuccessful in > > > > working out which -rcu commit to apply it to. Could you please > > > > tell me what commit to apply this to? (Once applied, git cherry-pick > > > > is usually pretty good about handling minor conflicts.) > > > > > > It was originally based on v5.3-rc2 > > > > > > I was able to apply it just now to the rcu -dev branch and I pushed it here: > > > https://github.com/joelagnel/linux-kernel.git (branch paul-dev) > > > > > > Let me know if any other issues, thanks for the change log rework! > > > > Pulled and cherry-picked, thank you! > > > > Just for grins, I also pushed out a from-joel.2019.08.16a showing the > > results of the pull. If you pull that branch, then run something like > > "gitk v5.3-rc2..", and then do the same with branch "dev", comparing the > > two might illustrate some of the reasons for the current restrictions > > on pull requests and trees subject to rebase. > > Right, I did the compare and see what you mean. I guess sending any > future pull requests against Linux -next would be the best option? Hmmm... You really want to send some pull requests, don't you? ;-) Suppose you had sent that pull request against Linux -next or v5.2 or wherever. What would happen next, given the high probability of a conflict with someone else's patch? What would the result look like? Thanx, Paul