NAK: ACK/Cmnt: [SRU][J, F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 0/1] Stop allowing RCU_SOFTIRQ in idle

[Tim Gardner]

Hi Bodong,

The issue is that the 2nd patch came in on a separate email thread. I 
checked the list server at [1] to make sure it wasn't just my 
Thunderbird email client. If these messages aren't on the same thread 
then they become separated in the large number of kteam list patches 
which makes it hard to track which patches have been reviewed or applied.

I always use 'git send-email --compose *.patch' in order to correctly 
group patches in the same thread.

rtg

[1] - 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2022-December/thread.html

On 12/8/22 13:19, Bodong Wang wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> 
> I'm totally lost on how to have this submitted.
> 
> Stefan told me it should be submitted like below:
> 
> [SRU J,F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 0/1] ...
> +- [SRU J:linux-bluefield][PATCH 1/1] ...
> +- [SRU F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 1/1] ...
> 
> I'm not sure how could one cover letter has two patch 1/1. Why can't we just apply the patch directly with each repo? Also, note that, same patch has conflict on F but not on J.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2022 1:43 PM
> To: Bodong Wang <bodong at nvidia.com>; kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com
> Cc: Vladimir Sokolovsky <vlad at nvidia.com>
> Subject: NAK: ACK/Cmnt: [SRU][J, F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 0/1] Stop allowing RCU_SOFTIRQ in idle
> 
> On 12/8/22 12:40 PM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> On 12/7/22 2:29 PM, Bodong Wang wrote:
>>> RCU_SOFTIRQ used to be special in that it could be raised on purpose
>>> within the idle path to prevent from stopping the tick. Some code
>>> still prevents from unnecessary warnings related to this specific
>>> behaviour while entering in dynticks-idle mode.
>>>
>>> However the nohz layout has changed quite a bit in ten years, and the
>>> removal of CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ has been the final straw to this
>>> safe-conduct. Now the RCU_SOFTIRQ vector is expected to be raised
>>> from sane places.
>>>
>>> This patch is applicable for both J and F.
>>>
>>> Frederic Weisbecker (1):
>>>     tick/rcu: Stop allowing RCU_SOFTIRQ in idle
>>>
>>>    include/linux/interrupt.h |  8 ++++++-
>>>    kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 50
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>    2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>> Acked-by: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com>
>>
>> I'll assume that '[SRU][F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 1/1]' applies to
>> Jammy as well, as is implied by '[SRU][J, F:linux-bluefield][PATCH 0/1]' ?
>>
> 
> Never mind, I see that the Jammy patch is outside this email tread.
> Please resubmit while making sure both patches are in the same thread.
> Otherwise managing patch states becomes quite tedious.
> 
> --
> -----------
> Tim Gardner
> Canonical, Inc
> 

-- 
-----------
Tim Gardner
Canonical, Inc