On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 03:39:49PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
[...]
> I applied what you suggested and re-named rcu_nmi_{enter,exit} to
^
rcu_nmi_{enter,exit}_common(bool irq)
> rcu_irq_{enter,exit} and applied the same re-naming to
^
rcu_irq_{enter,exit}_common(bool nmi)
> ->dynticks_nmi_nesting as well, since those are not things to do with
^
dynticks_nmi_nesting -> dynticks_irq_nesting
> nmi anymore but both irq and nmi.
>
> I think "irq" is better to represent both irq and nmi than "nmi".
> Please let me know if you don't think so. I can get rid of the re-
> naming from the patch.
--
Thanks,
Byungchul
