Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-08-29 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 03:28:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 09:51:34AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 04:44:25PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-08-29 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 03:28:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 09:51:34AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 04:44:25PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-06-27 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 09:51:34AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 04:44:25PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 7,

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-06-27 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 09:51:34AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 04:44:25PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 7,

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-06-08 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 04:44:25PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Ah, and any

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-06-08 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 04:44:25PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Ah, and any

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-04-10 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney > > wrote: > > > > > > Ah, and any thoughts on how best to get feedback from the

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-04-10 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:45:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney > > wrote: > > > > > > Ah, and any thoughts on how best to get feedback from the various people > > > who would

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-10 Thread Andrea Parri
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 02:47:26PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 05:29:46PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:55:20AM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-10 Thread Andrea Parri
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 02:47:26PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 05:29:46PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:55:20AM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-10 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 05:48:55PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 08:33:20AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> > >> Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-10 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 05:48:55PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 08:33:20AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> > >> Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to reduce the > >> number of rcu

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-09 Thread Lai Jiangshan
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 08:33:20AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to reduce the >> number of rcu variants does not make sense in private. We

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-09 Thread Lai Jiangshan
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 08:33:20AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to reduce the >> number of rcu variants does not make sense in private. We should have >> an archive of

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-08 Thread Andrea Parri
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 07:54:44AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 12:39:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > But if we

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-08 Thread Andrea Parri
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 07:54:44AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 12:39:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > But if we look at the bigger API

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-08 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > > > Ah, and any thoughts on how best to get feedback from the various people > > who would need to reprogram their fingers? Or is everyone

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-08 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:48:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > > > Ah, and any thoughts on how best to get feedback from the various people > > who would need to reprogram their fingers? Or is everyone already on > > board with

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-07 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Ah, and any thoughts on how best to get feedback from the various people > who would need to reprogram their fingers? Or is everyone already on > board with changing these various names? I really would

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-07 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Ah, and any thoughts on how best to get feedback from the various people > who would need to reprogram their fingers? Or is everyone already on > board with changing these various names? I really would prefer to not see massive

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-07 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 12:39:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > But if we look at the bigger API picture: > > > > > > > > > >

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-07 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 12:39:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > But if we look at the bigger API picture: > > > > > > > > > > !PREEMPT_RCU PREEMPT_RCU=y >

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 10:00:50AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > >I.e. the new RCU namespace would be something like: > > > > call_rcu => rcu_call_rcu > > typo: rcu_call(). > > > synchronize_rcu =>

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 10:00:50AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > >I.e. the new RCU namespace would be something like: > > > > call_rcu => rcu_call_rcu > > typo: rcu_call(). > > > synchronize_rcu => rcu_wait_ > > typo:

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > But if we look at the bigger API picture: > > > > > > > > !PREEMPT_RCU PREEMPT_RCU=y > > > > rcu_read_lock():atomic

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > But if we look at the bigger API picture: > > > > > > > > !PREEMPT_RCU PREEMPT_RCU=y > > > > rcu_read_lock():atomicpreemptible > > > >

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar wrote: >I.e. the new RCU namespace would be something like: > > call_rcu => rcu_call_rcu typo: rcu_call(). > synchronize_rcu => rcu_wait_ typo: rcu_wait(). Here's the updated table: # RCU APIs:

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar wrote: >I.e. the new RCU namespace would be something like: > > call_rcu => rcu_call_rcu typo: rcu_call(). > synchronize_rcu => rcu_wait_ typo: rcu_wait(). Here's the updated table: # RCU APIs: rcu_read_lock

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > But if we look at the bigger API picture: > > > > > > !PREEMPT_RCU PREEMPT_RCU=y > > > rcu_read_lock():atomicpreemptible > > > rcu_read_lock_sched(): atomicatomic > > >

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-06 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > But if we look at the bigger API picture: > > > > > > !PREEMPT_RCU PREEMPT_RCU=y > > > rcu_read_lock():atomicpreemptible > > > rcu_read_lock_sched(): atomicatomic > > > srcu_read_lock(): preemptible

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-05 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 08:33:20AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to reduce the > number of rcu variants does not make sense in private. We should have > an archive of such discussions. > > Ingo Molnar writes: >

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-05 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 08:33:20AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to reduce the > number of rcu variants does not make sense in private. We should have > an archive of such discussions. > > Ingo Molnar writes: > > > * Paul E.

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-05 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to reduce the number of rcu variants does not make sense in private. We should have an archive of such discussions. Ingo Molnar writes: > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> > So if people

Re: Simplifying our RCU models

2018-03-05 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Moving this discussion to a public list as discussing how to reduce the number of rcu variants does not make sense in private. We should have an archive of such discussions. Ingo Molnar writes: > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> > So if people really want that low-cost RCU, and some people