Re: Question about sched_setaffinity()

[Joel Fernandes]

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 05:20:43AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 03:05:39AM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > > > The fix is straightforward.  I just added "rcutorture.shuffle_interval=0"
> > > > > to the TRIVIAL.boot file, which stops rcutorture from shuffling its
> > > > > kthreads around.
> > > > 
> > > > I added the option to the file and I didn't reproduce the issue.
> > > 
> > > Thank you!  May I add your Tested-by?
> > 
> > Please feel free to do so.  But it may be worth to squash "the commits"
> > (and adjust the changelogs accordingly).  And you might want to remove
> > some of those debug checks/prints?
> 
> Revert/remove a number of the commits, but yes.  ;-)
> 
> And remove the extra loop, but leave the single WARN_ON() complaining
> about being on the wrong CPU.

The other "toy" implementation I noticed is based on reader/writer locking.

Would you see value in having that as an additional rcu torture type?

thanks,

 - Joel