Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:59:00 -0800 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | [PATCH] Fix comment to synchronize_sched() |
| |
Hello!
Fix to broken comment to synchronize_rcu() noted by Keith Owens. Also add sentence noting that synchronize_sched() and synchronize_rcu() are not necessarily identical.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com> CC: Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com> CC: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
---
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.15/include/linux/rcupdate.h linux-2.6.15-RCUcomment/include/linux/rcupdate.h --- linux-2.6.15/include/linux/rcupdate.h 2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.6.15-RCUcomment/include/linux/rcupdate.h 2006-01-17 18:48:33.000000000 -0800 @@ -265,11 +265,14 @@ static inline int rcu_pending(int cpu) * This means that all preempt_disable code sequences, including NMI and * hardware-interrupt handlers, in progress on entry will have completed * before this primitive returns. However, this does not guarantee that - * softirq handlers will have completed, since in some kernels + * softirq handlers will have completed, since in some kernels, these + * handlers can run in process context, and can block. * * This primitive provides the guarantees made by the (deprecated) * synchronize_kernel() API. In contrast, synchronize_rcu() only * guarantees that rcu_read_lock() sections will have completed. + * In "classic RCU", these two guarantees happen to be one and + * the same, but can differ in realtime RCU implementations. */ #define synchronize_sched() synchronize_rcu() - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |