)]}'
{
  "commit": "b3c213281da9908646e1671688e9adb42d0b7356",
  "tree": "5facb345b6abc287746ad17d848a3bbee44e4448",
  "parents": [
    "4c8b329d202fc7e05a296f45edef32976a90bf9d"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Joel Fernandes (Google)",
    "email": "joel@joelfernandes.org",
    "time": "Fri Mar 08 17:28:10 2024 -0500"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "Joel Fernandes (Google)",
    "email": "joel@joelfernandes.org",
    "time": "Fri Mar 08 18:05:37 2024 -0500"
  },
  "message": "rcu/tree: Add comments explaining now-offline-CPU QS reports\n\nThis a confusing piece of code (rightfully so as the issue it deals with\nis complex). Recent discussions brought up a question -- what prevents the\nrcu_implicit_dyntick_qs() from warning about QS reports for offline\nCPUs.\n\nQS reporting for now-offline CPUs should only happen from:\n- gp_init()\n- rcutree_cpu_report_dead()\n\nAdd some comments to this code explaining how QS reporting is not\nmissed when these functions are concurrently running.\n\nSigned-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) \u003cjoel@joelfernandes.org\u003e\n",
  "tree_diff": [
    {
      "type": "modify",
      "old_id": "bd29fe3c76bfe0d4259f772342f95a1ab71c676f",
      "old_mode": 33188,
      "old_path": "kernel/rcu/tree.c",
      "new_id": "0df659a878eef3fb34a496bf889c7b074d57600d",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "kernel/rcu/tree.c"
    }
  ]
}