Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the tip tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:51:56 +1000

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in:

  kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h

between commit:

  b03fbd4ff24c ("sched: Introduce task_is_running()")

from the tip tree and commit:

  9f460390aac1 ("rcu/nocb: Start moving nocb code to its own plugin file")

from the rcu tree.

I fixed it up (I added the following merge fix patch) and can carry the
fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned,
but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream
maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want
to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to
minimise any particularly complex conflicts.

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:49:27 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] fix for code movement to kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
index bf2690ca5d2b..8fdf44f8523f 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
@@ -1311,7 +1311,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_bind_current_to_nocb);
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 static char *show_rcu_should_be_on_cpu(struct task_struct *tsp)
 {
-	return tsp && tsp->state == TASK_RUNNING && !tsp->on_cpu ? "!" : "";
+	return tsp && task_is_running(tsp) && !tsp->on_cpu ? "!" : "";
 }
 #else // #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 static char *show_rcu_should_be_on_cpu(struct task_struct *tsp)
-- 
2.30.2

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell