Merge branch 'core-rcu-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip

* 'core-rcu-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip: (28 commits)
  rcu: Move end of special early-boot RCU operation earlier
  rcu: Changes from reviews: avoid casts, fix/add warnings, improve comments
  rcu: Create rcutree plugins to handle hotplug CPU for multi-level trees
  rcu: Remove lockdep annotations from RCU's _notrace() API members
  rcu: Add #ifdef to suppress __rcu_offline_cpu() warning in !HOTPLUG_CPU builds
  rcu: Add CPU-offline processing for single-node configurations
  rcu: Add "notrace" to RCU function headers used by ftrace
  rcu: Remove CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
  rcu: Merge preemptable-RCU functionality into hierarchical RCU
  rcu: Simplify rcu_pending()/rcu_check_callbacks() API
  rcu: Use debugfs_remove_recursive() simplify code.
  rcu: Merge per-RCU-flavor initialization into pre-existing macro
  rcu: Fix online/offline indication for rcudata.csv trace file
  rcu: Consolidate sparse and lockdep declarations in include/linux/rcupdate.h
  rcu: Renamings to increase RCU clarity
  rcu: Move private definitions from include/linux/rcutree.h to kernel/rcutree.h
  rcu: Expunge lingering references to CONFIG_CLASSIC_RCU, optimize on !SMP
  rcu: Delay rcu_barrier() wait until beginning of next CPU-hotunplug operation.
  rcu: Fix typo in rcu_irq_exit() comment header
  rcu: Make rcupreempt_trace.c look at offline CPUs
  ...

1 files changed, 15 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
index accfe2f5247d..51525a30e8b4 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
@@ -11,7 +11,10 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	structure is updated more than about 10% of the time, then
 	you should strongly consider some other approach, unless
 	detailed performance measurements show that RCU is nonetheless
-	the right tool for the job.
+	the right tool for the job.  Yes, you might think of RCU
+	as simply cutting overhead off of the readers and imposing it
+	on the writers.  That is exactly why normal uses of RCU will
+	do much more reading than updating.
 
 	Another exception is where performance is not an issue, and RCU
 	provides a simpler implementation.  An example of this situation
@@ -240,10 +243,11 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	instead need to use synchronize_irq() or synchronize_sched().
 
 12.	Any lock acquired by an RCU callback must be acquired elsewhere
-	with irq disabled, e.g., via spin_lock_irqsave().  Failing to
-	disable irq on a given acquisition of that lock will result in
-	deadlock as soon as the RCU callback happens to interrupt that
-	acquisition's critical section.
+	with softirq disabled, e.g., via spin_lock_irqsave(),
+	spin_lock_bh(), etc.  Failing to disable irq on a given
+	acquisition of that lock will result in deadlock as soon as the
+	RCU callback happens to interrupt that acquisition's critical
+	section.
 
 13.	RCU callbacks can be and are executed in parallel.  In many cases,
 	the callback code simply wrappers around kfree(), so that this
@@ -310,3 +314,9 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	Because these primitives only wait for pre-existing readers,
 	it is the caller's responsibility to guarantee safety to
 	any subsequent readers.
+
+16.	The various RCU read-side primitives do -not- contain memory
+	barriers.  The CPU (and in some cases, the compiler) is free
+	to reorder code into and out of RCU read-side critical sections.
+	It is the responsibility of the RCU update-side primitives to
+	deal with this.