All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
	Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] rwsem: consistently use adjustment variable
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 12:45:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1195.1273664737@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1273634462-2672-5-git-send-email-walken@google.com>

Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com> wrote:

> Cleanup: previous change introduced an adjustment variable used in
> waking writers; the code to wake readers can be made nicer by making
> use of that same variable.
> 
> Reducing variable count should hopefully help both humans and compilers
> looking at this function :)

Actually, no.  The compiler doesn't care.  With optimisation, the variable
'woken' would cease to exist after being copied to loop and added into
adjustment.  What it would probably do is just relabel 'woken' internally as
'loop'.

>From a human point of view, I would say keep woken, but use it to initialise
adjustment:

	adjustment = woken * RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS;

and use it to initialise 'loop':

	for (loop = woken; loop > 0; loop--) {

or just ditch 'loop' and use 'woken' directly, since the number of processes
to be woken goes down as the loop iterates.

Whatever, the compiler won't care, since loop and woken will just be names for
the same value.

David

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-12 11:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-12  3:20 [PATCH 00/12] rwsem changes + down_read_unfair() proposal Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 01/12] rwsem: test for no active locks in __rwsem_do_wake undo code Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 10:39   ` David Howells
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 02/12] rwsem: use single atomic update for sem count when waking up readers Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 11:01   ` David Howells
2010-05-13  0:54     ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 11:36   ` David Howells
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 03/12] rwsem: let RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS represent any number of waiting threads Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 04/12] rwsem: consistently use adjustment variable Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 11:45   ` David Howells [this message]
2010-05-13  1:12     ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 05/12] x86 rwsem: take advantage of new RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS semantics Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:10   ` David Howells
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 06/12] rwsem: wake queued readers when other readers are active Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:22   ` David Howells
2010-05-13  2:39     ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-13  5:41       ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 07/12] rwsem: wake queued readers when writer blocks on active read lock Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:33   ` David Howells
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 08/12] rwsem: smaller wrappers around rwsem_down_failed_common Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:36   ` David Howells
2010-05-12 12:42   ` David Howells
2010-05-13  2:54     ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12  3:20 ` [PATCH 09/12] generic rwsem: implement down_read_unfair Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:46   ` David Howells
2010-05-12  3:21 ` [PATCH 10/12] rwsem: down_read_unfair infrastructure support Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12  3:21 ` [PATCH 11/12] x86 rwsem: down_read_unfair implementation Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 13:08   ` David Howells
2010-05-12  3:21 ` [PATCH 12/12] Use down_read_unfair() for /sys/<pid>/exe and /sys/<pid>/maps files Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 13:10   ` David Howells
2010-05-12 22:53   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-12 23:35     ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-13  0:32       ` KOSAKI Motohiro

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1195.1273664737@redhat.com \
    --to=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikew@google.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=suleiman@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=walken@google.com \
    --cc=yinghan@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.