On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 01:45:57AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 01:50:58AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 03:08:09PM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > > bool rcu_segcblist_accelerate(struct rcu_segcblist *rsclp, unsigned long
> > > seq)
> > > {
> > > - int i;
> > > + int i, j;
> > >
> > > WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_segcblist_is_enabled(rsclp));
> > > if (rcu_segcblist_restempty(rsclp, RCU_DONE_TAIL))
> > > @@ -487,6 +508,10 @@ bool rcu_segcblist_accelerate(struct rcu_segcblist
> > > *rsclp, unsigned long seq)
> > > if (rcu_segcblist_restempty(rsclp, i) || ++i >= RCU_NEXT_TAIL)
> > > return false;
> > >
> > > + /* Accounting: everything below i is about to get merged into i. */
> > > + for (j = i + 1; j <= RCU_NEXT_TAIL; j++)
> > > + rcu_segcblist_move_seglen(rsclp, j, i);
> > > +
> >
> > Can you perhaps reuse the below loop to move the seglen?
>
> Not easily, because we will need to store 'i' into another variable then,
> which
> does not change.
>
> Besides IMHO, the code is more readable with the loops separated.
Works for me.
Thanks!
