On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 06:59:52PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2019-03-20 10:30:01 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 05:35:32PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > On 2019-03-20 09:15:00 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > I am considering making it a module_param() to avoid namespace
> > > > pollution,
> > > > as it would become something like rcutree.nosoftirq.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > nope, perfect.
> >
> > Please see below for an untested patch. Thoughts?
>
> > - if (rcu_softirq_enabled) {
> > + if (!nosoftirq) {
> > raise_softirq(RCU_SOFTIRQ);
> > } else {
>
> This double negation looks weird. Can we flip the logic somehow?
> /me testing if it works…
We could name it something like "use_softirq" and initialize it to true.
I am OK either way.
Thanx, Paul
