On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 09:09:01PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 11:49 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> >
> > Huh, I thought GCC knew to not emit that warning unless it actually
> > found control flow reaching the end of the function; since the
> > infinite
> > loop has no brea
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 11:49:21AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 10:32:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 03:39:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > +static int rcu_gp_kthread(
On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 11:49 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> Huh, I thought GCC knew to not emit that warning unless it actually
> found control flow reaching the end of the function; since the
> infinite
> loop has no break in it, you shouldn't need the return. Annoying.
tag the function with _
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 10:32:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 03:39:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > +static int rcu_gp_kthread(void *arg)
> > > +{
> > > + struct rcu_state *rsp = arg;
> > > +
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 03:39:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > +static int rcu_gp_kthread(void *arg)
> > +{
> > + struct rcu_state *rsp = arg;
> > + struct rcu_node *rnp = rcu_get_root(rsp);
> > +
> > + for (;;) {
>
On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> +static int rcu_gp_kthread(void *arg)
> +{
> + struct rcu_state *rsp = arg;
> + struct rcu_node *rnp = rcu_get_root(rsp);
> +
> + for (;;) {
> +
> + /* Handle grace-period start. */
> + for (;
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:18:21AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> From: "Paul E. McKenney"
>
> Then rcu_gp_kthread() function is too large and furthermore needs to
> have the force_quiescent_state() code pulled in. This commit therefore
> breaks up rcu_gp_kthread() into rcu_gp_init() and rcu_g
7 matches
Mail list logo
