On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 01:52:15PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:

On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 16:57:33 +0000
Mark Rutland [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

* Use rcu_tasks_trace to synchronize updates?

Yes. I think I wanted both. The above to make sure it covers all cases
where something could be preempted, and a case for those covered when RCU
isn't watching (which always has preemption disabled).

My mistake was I thought synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude() did both. But I just
found out recently that it is not a superset of synchronize_rcu_tasks().

But it really needs it in every location that synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude()
is called.

Should any RCU Tasks Rude grace-period request also wait for an RCU Tasks
grace period?

I would feel better about proposing this, especially for
call_rcu_tasks_rude(), if RCU Tasks Rude was not supposed to be going
away after all the noinstr tags are in place.

							Thanx, Paul