All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
	bskeggs@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	jhubbard@nvidia.com, rcampbell@nvidia.com, jglisse@redhat.com,
	jgg@nvidia.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, willy@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 09:27:33 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6407817.nLXe9rGL3b@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210315075113.GD4136862@infradead.org>

On Monday, 15 March 2021 6:51:13 PM AEDT Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > -	/*XXX: atomic? */
> > -	return (fa->access = 0 || fa->access = 3) -
> > -	       (fb->access = 0 || fb->access = 3);
> > +	/* Atomic access (2) has highest priority */
> > +	return (-1*(fa->access = 2) + (fa->access = 0 || fa->access = 3)) -
> > +	       (-1*(fb->access = 2) + (fb->access = 0 || fb->access = 3));
> 
> This looks really unreabable.  If the magic values 0, 2 and 3 had names
> it might become a little more understadable, then factor the duplicated
> calculation of the priority value into a helper and we'll have code that
> mere humans can understand..

Fair enough, will add some definitions for the magic values.

> > +		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +		if (mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> > +					    notifier_seq)) {
> > +			mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +			continue;
> > +		}
> > +		break;
> > +	}
> 
> This looks good, why not:
> 
> 		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> 		if (!mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> 					     notifier_seq))
> 			break;
> 		mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> 	}

I had copied that from nouveau_range_fault() but this suggestion is better. 
Will update, thanks for looking.



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<bskeggs@redhat.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<jhubbard@nvidia.com>, <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
	<jglisse@redhat.com>, <jgg@nvidia.com>, <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	<willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 20:27:33 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6407817.nLXe9rGL3b@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210315075113.GD4136862@infradead.org>

On Monday, 15 March 2021 6:51:13 PM AEDT Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > -	/*XXX: atomic? */
> > -	return (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3) -
> > -	       (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3);
> > +	/* Atomic access (2) has highest priority */
> > +	return (-1*(fa->access == 2) + (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3)) -
> > +	       (-1*(fb->access == 2) + (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3));
> 
> This looks really unreabable.  If the magic values 0, 2 and 3 had names
> it might become a little more understadable, then factor the duplicated
> calculation of the priority value into a helper and we'll have code that
> mere humans can understand..

Fair enough, will add some definitions for the magic values.

> > +		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +		if (mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> > +					    notifier_seq)) {
> > +			mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +			continue;
> > +		}
> > +		break;
> > +	}
> 
> This looks good, why not:
> 
> 		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> 		if (!mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> 					     notifier_seq))
> 			break;
> 		mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> 	}

I had copied that from nouveau_range_fault() but this suggestion is better. 
Will update, thanks for looking.




WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: rcampbell@nvidia.com, willy@infradead.org, daniel@ffwll.ch,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, bskeggs@redhat.com,
	jgg@nvidia.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH v6 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 20:27:33 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6407817.nLXe9rGL3b@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210315075113.GD4136862@infradead.org>

On Monday, 15 March 2021 6:51:13 PM AEDT Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > -	/*XXX: atomic? */
> > -	return (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3) -
> > -	       (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3);
> > +	/* Atomic access (2) has highest priority */
> > +	return (-1*(fa->access == 2) + (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3)) -
> > +	       (-1*(fb->access == 2) + (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3));
> 
> This looks really unreabable.  If the magic values 0, 2 and 3 had names
> it might become a little more understadable, then factor the duplicated
> calculation of the priority value into a helper and we'll have code that
> mere humans can understand..

Fair enough, will add some definitions for the magic values.

> > +		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +		if (mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> > +					    notifier_seq)) {
> > +			mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +			continue;
> > +		}
> > +		break;
> > +	}
> 
> This looks good, why not:
> 
> 		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> 		if (!mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> 					     notifier_seq))
> 			break;
> 		mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> 	}

I had copied that from nouveau_range_fault() but this suggestion is better. 
Will update, thanks for looking.



_______________________________________________
Nouveau mailing list
Nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: rcampbell@nvidia.com, willy@infradead.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, jglisse@redhat.com,
	bskeggs@redhat.com, jgg@nvidia.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 20:27:33 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6407817.nLXe9rGL3b@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210315075113.GD4136862@infradead.org>

On Monday, 15 March 2021 6:51:13 PM AEDT Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > -	/*XXX: atomic? */
> > -	return (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3) -
> > -	       (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3);
> > +	/* Atomic access (2) has highest priority */
> > +	return (-1*(fa->access == 2) + (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3)) -
> > +	       (-1*(fb->access == 2) + (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3));
> 
> This looks really unreabable.  If the magic values 0, 2 and 3 had names
> it might become a little more understadable, then factor the duplicated
> calculation of the priority value into a helper and we'll have code that
> mere humans can understand..

Fair enough, will add some definitions for the magic values.

> > +		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +		if (mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> > +					    notifier_seq)) {
> > +			mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> > +			continue;
> > +		}
> > +		break;
> > +	}
> 
> This looks good, why not:
> 
> 		mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> 		if (!mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> 					     notifier_seq))
> 			break;
> 		mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> 	}

I had copied that from nouveau_range_fault() but this suggestion is better. 
Will update, thanks for looking.



_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-22  9:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-12  8:38 [PATCH v6 0/8] Add support for SVM atomics in Nouveau Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 1/8] mm: Remove special swap entry functions Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-15  7:27   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-15  7:27     ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-22  9:20     ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-22  9:20       ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-22  9:20       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-22  9:20       ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 2/8] mm/swapops: Rework swap entry manipulation code Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-15  7:28   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-15  7:28     ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 4/8] mm/rmap: Split migration into its own function Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-15  7:42   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-15  7:42     ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-22 10:27     ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-22 10:27       ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-22 10:27       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-22 10:27       ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 6/8] mm: Selftests for exclusive device memory Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 7/8] nouveau/svm: Refactor nouveau_range_fault Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38 ` [PATCH v6 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-12  8:38   ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-15  7:51   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-15  7:51     ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-15  7:51     ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-22  9:27     ` Alistair Popple [this message]
2021-03-22  9:27       ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-22  9:27       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-22  9:27       ` Alistair Popple

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=6407817.nLXe9rGL3b@nvdebian \
    --to=apopple@nvidia.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bskeggs@redhat.com \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=rcampbell@nvidia.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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.