From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] xen/arm: vgic: Keep track of vIRQ
	used by a domain
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:36:35 +0000
Message-ID: <54E4CDA3.1020506@linaro.org>
References: <1422546694-22797-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>	
	<1422546694-22797-2-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>
	<1422889793.4801.13.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <julien.grall@linaro.org>) id 1YO8YD-0002JC-5D
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:36:41 +0000
Received: by wesu56 with SMTP id u56so2547839wes.10
	for <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>;
	Wed, 18 Feb 2015 09:36:38 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1422889793.4801.13.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: christoffer.dall@linaro.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, tim@xen.org, parth.dixit@linaro.org, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi Ian,

On 02/02/2015 15:09, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-01-29 at 15:51 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
>>          - Move the retry after looking for first/end. I keep the goto
>>          rather than a loop because it's more clear that we retry because
>>          we were unable to set the bit
>
> Then I think a "do {} while (!successfully allocated)" is what is
> wanted, maybe with a comment.

I though about it and I find the do {} while more difficult to read than 
the goto in this specific case.

I find more explicit with the goto that we will unlikely retry.
y. Adding a comment in the code doesn't really help.

the do {} while version would look like:

    do {
         virq = find_next_zero_bit(d->arch.vgic.allocated_irqs, end, first);
         if ( virq >= end )
             return -1;

         ret = test_and_set_bit(virq, d->arch.vgic.allocated_irqs);
         /* There is no spinlock to protect allocated_irqs, therefore
          * test_and_set_bit may unlikely fail. If so retry it.
          */
     } while ( unlikely(ret) )

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall