From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Wagner Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:12:44 +0100 Message-ID: <5639F63C.9040609@bmw-carit.de> References: <1445326090-1698-1-git-send-email-daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de> <1445326090-1698-2-git-send-email-daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Paul Gortmaker , Marcelo Tosatti , Paolo Bonzini , "Paul E. McKenney" To: Thomas Gleixner Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org On 11/04/2015 11:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Daniel Wagner wrote: >> + >> +extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q); >> +extern void swake_up_all(struct swait_queue_head *q); >> +extern void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q); > > I intentionally named these functions swait_wake* in my initial > implementation for two reasons: > > - typoing wake_up vs. swake_up only emits a compiler warning and does > not break the build I played a bit around on this and came up with the patch below. The type check results in an error. > - I really prefer new infrastructure to have a consistent prefix > which reflects the "subsystem". That's simpler to read and simpler > to grep for. > >> +extern void __prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait); >> +extern void prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state); >> +extern long prepare_to_swait_event(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state); >> + >> +extern void __finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait); >> +extern void finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait); > > Can we please go with the original names? > > swait_prepare() > swait_prepare_locked() > swait_finish() > swait_finish_locked() > > Hmm? I defer to Peter :) >> +#define swait_event(wq, condition) \ > > Here we have the same swait vs. wait problem as above. So either we > come up with a slightly different name or have an explicit type check > in __swait_event event. What about something like this: diff --git a/include/linux/swait.h b/include/linux/swait.h index c1f9c62..f59369d 100644 --- a/include/linux/swait.h +++ b/include/linux/swait.h @@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ #include #include +#define compiletime_assert_same_type(a, b) \ + compiletime_assert(__same_type(a, b), "Need to match correct type"); + /* * Simple wait queues * @@ -66,6 +69,7 @@ extern void __init_swait_queue_head(struct swait_queue_head *q, const char *name #define init_swait_queue_head(q) \ do { \ static struct lock_class_key __key; \ + compiletime_assert_same_type(struct swait_queue_head *, q); \ __init_swait_queue_head((q), #q, &__key); \ } while (0)