On 07/17/2014 09:01 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On 07/16/2014 08:55 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> On 07/16/2014 09:29 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>> On 07/16/2014 08:47 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:57:59PM -0400, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/15/2014 06:53 PM, j...@joshtriplett.org wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:31:48PM -0400, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>>>>>> This commit removes a stale comment in rcu/tree.c.
>>>>>>> FYI, an updated comment exists a few lines below this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.pr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> In general, when removing a stale comment, I'd suggest explaining why
>>>>>> the comment is stale. Was code removed without removing the
>>>>>> corresponding comment, or was code changed such that the comment no
>>>>>> longer applies, or...?
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess it was left out when code was moved around previously. And I did
>>>>> mention that an updated comment is there a few lines below.
>>>>>
>>>>> For reference this is the new comment which is below the old comment,
>>>>> they mean the same :)
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Remove the outgoing CPU from the masks in the rcu_node hierarchy.
>>>>> */
>>>>
>>>> Indeed that is the case.
>>>>
>>>> Please update the commit log with this explanation and resend.
>>>>
>>>> Thanx, Paul
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please find the updated patch below.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Pranith
>>>
>>> From: Pranith Kumar <bobby.pr...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:01:05 -0400
>>> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] rcu: Remove stale comment in tree.c
>>>
>>> This commit removes a stale comment in rcu/tree.c which was left out when
>>> some
>>> code was moved around previously.
>>
>> Which commit caused this leftover comment? Could you mention that commit in
>> your changlog?
>>
>> 12BitsCmmtID ("commit title...")
>>
>
> Sure, please find an updated patch with Josh Triplett's sign-off added:
>
> From: Pranith Kumar <bobby.pr...@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:01:05 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] rcu: Remove stale comment in tree.c
>
>
> This commit removes a stale comment in rcu/tree.c which was left out in
> commit 2036d94a7b61ca5032ce (rcu: Rework detection of use of RCU by offline
> CPUs)
I suggest you use the following syntax in future.
2036d94a7b61 ("rcu: Rework detection of use of RCU by offline CPUs")
>
> For reference, the following updated comment exists a few lines below this
> which
> means the same.
>
> /* Remove the outgoing CPU from the masks in the rcu_node hierarchy. */
>
> Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.pr...@gmail.com>
> Reviewed-by: Joe Tripplett <j...@joshtriplett.org>
Reviewed-by: Lai Jiangshan <la...@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index a1abaa8..e67246e 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -2211,8 +2211,6 @@ static void rcu_cleanup_dead_cpu(int cpu, struct
> rcu_state *rsp)
> /* Adjust any no-longer-needed kthreads. */
> rcu_boost_kthread_setaffinity(rnp, -1);
>
> - /* Remove the dead CPU from the bitmasks in the rcu_node hierarchy. */
> -
> /* Exclude any attempts to start a new grace period. */
> mutex_lock(&rsp->onoff_mutex);
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rsp->orphan_lock, flags);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
