From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97BE2C48BF6 for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:32:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.687216.1070327 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfiOT-0006p6-0W; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:32:21 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 687216.1070327; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:32:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfiOS-0006oz-SW; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:32:20 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 687216; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:32:19 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-sth1-in.inumbo.com ([159.253.27.254] helo=se1-gles-sth1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfiOR-0006ot-KF for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:32:19 +0000 Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) by se1-gles-sth1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id b908e2de-d717-11ee-afd8-a90da7624cb6; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:32:18 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a3122b70439so191127266b.3 for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 07:32:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.156.60.236] (ip-037-024-206-209.um08.pools.vodafone-ip.de. [37.24.206.209]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id tj7-20020a170907c24700b00a413d1eda4bsm789972ejc.87.2024.02.29.07.32.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Feb 2024 07:32:17 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: b908e2de-d717-11ee-afd8-a90da7624cb6 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1709220738; x=1709825538; darn=lists.xenproject.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:autocrypt:from:references:cc :to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xrC7QPOJE9dPLFEXGY/QD3AwNupVDWNAcYL77MydVgI=; b=Ej4+ridFvusv1lWXL8rPuXY0FBrdNNl7AJW1kzbbo9D7Ld49zRu8luvcTSjqnc001t cq/zUvhhm8YcB/zFlyrmFLF/8vxeouSjLaq5V3e0hOyNzYLPXP3jsxR+fW0d3jKlskfT vrmrCsQVuPPhnV1PZJU3zPS3I+RqOm0Nshbe9pwtwl/MFdJ93cGC+Lq24FJMikL9wF2X O2Kv0so8PM40NSY4SQ130lDdmZQWO2HXsTvB+uEuX3PH73cjsE5wwIktFccd4uOWUDRc Fr4/wfMaZ1PQuunCCIy1hcwP8j4Az7YDMmunMXetHpBx2c5vjVOjFjiex/Li5eqxkd2E hP/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709220738; x=1709825538; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:autocrypt:from:references:cc :to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xrC7QPOJE9dPLFEXGY/QD3AwNupVDWNAcYL77MydVgI=; b=izpx3yndlV90SUg8i3CcPR8LL61p3f6ai+i/I6ljGS+Isdr4SvEO2uIpqlCYd95lJq Ok1E5l9mcxvRp9IIDUOF2UPKmxJ4qYeAZL4ONMFvQAZE2DJndCf/h3QbujTD/BzQ0dvn 7driV+M/NCcQbxN0+XnE/4EujjreTUGXIbXEYT0+iSba2hKunONA7BpQYdRpz76Gd/T9 3zQ4rb67izolwJoNhdeJa/iysIyNI+d3tsraylt+AH+4UWwi7kjQwZVmx+g3HydzH+uS mdWH7zoTwq6kK3Xcz/fBW/IYdUDk/0idiASi3ZHWIHV4IHYeVBHhMo/Om3nHCQVgZ5XW IESA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVFZMxlKWpzzV86uUwNSmaN1AfA5mo94s8IgnOWbdpwIyZZpq35ObGx59i6i3x1meglXIyj7SD27h+9a9D+XO/fT3mtV5MCgF74y8GUTJk= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwNUveRBsuSg4MUiX6eFpGdo5X9AU+9+jYUWF6njs75x9I6wEvK wvZmWvXM7kOZmudSFwih5pb1OAiXW3Q9t8ounNStohPnUuhQDkZZ7YalmCqCww== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGARFwoa5UH0HPSKNdPrSOO4KJU7cEPAU/hvgniIIUms646HVf396WwLqeEeunP1DRnH/pHiA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d8b4:b0:a42:615:1395 with SMTP id qc20-20020a170906d8b400b00a4206151395mr1930469ejb.11.1709220737946; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 07:32:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:32:16 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/12] xen/spinlock: split recursive spinlocks from normal ones Content-Language: en-US To: Juergen Gross Cc: Andrew Cooper , George Dunlap , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini , Wei Liu , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org References: <20231212094725.22184-1-jgross@suse.com> <20231212094725.22184-11-jgross@suse.com> From: Jan Beulich Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@suse.com; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL In-Reply-To: <20231212094725.22184-11-jgross@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12.12.2023 10:47, Juergen Gross wrote: > --- a/xen/common/spinlock.c > +++ b/xen/common/spinlock.c > @@ -541,6 +541,55 @@ void rspin_unlock_irqrestore(rspinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags) > local_irq_restore(flags); > } > > +int nrspin_trylock(rspinlock_t *lock) > +{ > + check_lock(&lock->debug, true); > + > + if ( unlikely(lock->recurse_cpu != SPINLOCK_NO_CPU) ) > + return 0; > + > + return spin_trylock_common(&lock->tickets, &lock->debug, LOCK_PROFILE_PAR); > +} I wonder if we shouldn't take the opportunity and stop having trylock functions have "int" return type. Perhaps already spin_trylock_common() when introduced could use "bool" instead, then here following suit. > +void nrspin_lock(rspinlock_t *lock) > +{ > + spin_lock_common(&lock->tickets, &lock->debug, LOCK_PROFILE_PAR, NULL, > + NULL); > +} > + > +void nrspin_unlock(rspinlock_t *lock) > +{ > + spin_unlock_common(&lock->tickets, &lock->debug, LOCK_PROFILE_PAR); > +} > + > +void nrspin_lock_irq(rspinlock_t *lock) > +{ > + ASSERT(local_irq_is_enabled()); > + local_irq_disable(); > + nrspin_lock(lock); > +} > + > +void nrspin_unlock_irq(rspinlock_t *lock) > +{ > + nrspin_unlock(lock); > + local_irq_enable(); > +} > + > +unsigned long __nrspin_lock_irqsave(rspinlock_t *lock) > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + > + local_irq_save(flags); > + nrspin_lock(lock); > + return flags; Nit: Strictly speaking we want a blank line ahead of this "return". > @@ -166,11 +172,15 @@ struct lock_profile_qhead { }; > struct lock_profile { }; > > #define SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED { \ > + .debug =_LOCK_DEBUG, \ > +} > +#define RSPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED { \ > + .debug =_LOCK_DEBUG, \ > .recurse_cpu = SPINLOCK_NO_CPU, \ > .debug =_LOCK_DEBUG, \ > } Initializing .debug twice? > @@ -180,7 +190,6 @@ struct lock_profile { }; > > #endif > > - > typedef union { > uint32_t head_tail; > struct { Looks like this might be undoing what the earlier patch isn't going to do anymore? > @@ -242,6 +257,19 @@ void rspin_unlock_irqrestore(rspinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags); > int rspin_is_locked(const rspinlock_t *lock); > void rspin_barrier(rspinlock_t *lock); > > +int nrspin_trylock(rspinlock_t *lock); > +void nrspin_lock(rspinlock_t *lock); > +void nrspin_unlock(rspinlock_t *lock); > +void nrspin_lock_irq(rspinlock_t *lock); > +void nrspin_unlock_irq(rspinlock_t *lock); > +#define nrspin_lock_irqsave(l, f) \ > + ({ \ > + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(f) != sizeof(unsigned long)); \ > + ((f) = __nrspin_lock_irqsave(l)); \ I don't think the outer pair of parentheses is needed here. As to the leading double underscores, see comments elsewhere. Jan