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 90A95C5478C for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:19:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.686706.1069059 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfLiS-0002Sg-Rl; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:19:28 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 686706.1069059; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:19:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfLiS-0002SZ-Op; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:19:28 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 686706; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:19:27 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-flk1-in.inumbo.com ([94.247.172.50] helo=se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfLiR-0002R9-9h for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:19:27 +0000 Received: from mail-lf1-x12d.google.com (mail-lf1-x12d.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::12d]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id c1bf193f-d64c-11ee-a1ee-f123f15fe8a2; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 16:19:25 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lf1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-51320536bddso137794e87.3 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 07:19:25 -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 vx2-20020a170907a78200b00a43af1ea069sm1759193ejc.118.2024.02.28.07.19.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Feb 2024 07:19:24 -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: c1bf193f-d64c-11ee-a1ee-f123f15fe8a2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1709133565; x=1709738365; 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=yZ+PpHwHuxyIijc08+YFX/whxYqZCaXqTIzosDoQE3U=; b=bfDizt9qKF2qdiTrBnPZoYvLAtvhfKlIDqZ7jT2aBcWTKDvOevEeA85p9wZKDFfDP1 X7vdSjbd48oejjpmlYOj1+4sz3iFJqG2pFM96pQRb2N+aBz0mt5W6+qgpammOKr8mUtj 6cZU/JGgp7moBGy7YYXpuJLVWC7fi14YqgaoVdNHPvfswACF9krmSeoKCoxyOp7SahXQ +tmwNsssN2BcgJ3m55TrktmMR6UOiJzASm4YLMKwWH9bmltxDQZpp1tSAXWFKulMT6AS 9gNEw8j265n3P2BxHZHG024drHF2GrS4MpBjNRHe9efsdRpkjDFiM2gPPFnCAGcKL12/ AbEA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709133565; x=1709738365; 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=yZ+PpHwHuxyIijc08+YFX/whxYqZCaXqTIzosDoQE3U=; b=iXsFfDhEo/zHXe/43mbjfIr7dWMiXgKGJPRRhyXSSvSYvnwuAJdnufVM+1RcoEt9+A MZnqDwDLprmoDefPY6HXKKMMBfN1Qzv/VSFusUbIcrvAirzYFFrpEKVo/h2VcBmfUaNA N32XrvDoo/ZeTiPUni3kNb1QJyAWNWMWABUmiUs7/JAa3mk0GFp1WnspqoD5cUeC4qOc r+pNlFhkFrMT1fMVRD07zHEBAuN2NVmprJEajxgfnZDV9BbvYo88AZUwCWUh76FqTArC Z+UzUSReLNQbtIPPAyw7GDLALd69L4ML4c7LGRgyoKVYck/0T7BZFelbUl945poWMISy kS2A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU9ehFhku+FQCJeryKmaDd9w7SkhLOYs6YZqhdinpkph6w1g7E5CkZNQ0RPXEkIyrrj8+mGeROl9Hk7F8Dz+o5ml/skwD6VhPCHFkaVEHQ= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw7bwUCq6ssBk0CUSBvX79J8iGf7ldXC4CPkYFlCLACjVy2xkkV Nnp19fO78EohH5wl53KT2vyhcGDBie3dX1rUyqc9SjR+HYoaywutOBCyEl+2VQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFVk2Bp7m0sbV9PRMR3aOQVvbTjLBNpY3sBEoF4kecksBYzga+ZJjMaHKxPyvbIFwGmLbdL4A== X-Received: by 2002:a19:ac4b:0:b0:513:202b:9001 with SMTP id r11-20020a19ac4b000000b00513202b9001mr12174lfc.6.1709133564656; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 07:19:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 16:19:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/12] xen/spinlock: make struct lock_profile rspinlock_t aware Content-Language: en-US To: Juergen Gross Cc: Andrew Cooper , George Dunlap , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini , Wei Liu , Alejandro Vallejo , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org References: <20231212094725.22184-1-jgross@suse.com> <20231212094725.22184-7-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: <20231212094725.22184-7-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 > @@ -538,19 +538,31 @@ static void spinlock_profile_iterate(lock_profile_subfunc *sub, void *par) > static void cf_check spinlock_profile_print_elem(struct lock_profile *data, > int32_t type, int32_t idx, void *par) > { > - struct spinlock *lock = data->lock; > + unsigned int cpu; > + uint32_t lockval; Any reason for this not being unsigned int as well? The more that ... > + if ( data->is_rlock ) > + { > + cpu = data->rlock->debug.cpu; > + lockval = data->rlock->tickets.head_tail; > + } > + else > + { > + cpu = data->lock->debug.cpu; > + lockval = data->lock->tickets.head_tail; > + } > > printk("%s ", lock_profile_ancs[type].name); > if ( type != LOCKPROF_TYPE_GLOBAL ) > printk("%d ", idx); > - printk("%s: addr=%p, lockval=%08x, ", data->name, lock, > - lock->tickets.head_tail); > - if ( lock->debug.cpu == SPINLOCK_NO_CPU ) > + printk("%s: addr=%p, lockval=%08x, ", data->name, data->lock, lockval); ... it's then printed with plain x as the format char. > + if ( cpu == SPINLOCK_NO_CPU ) > printk("not locked\n"); > else > - printk("cpu=%d\n", lock->debug.cpu); > - printk(" lock:%" PRId64 "(%" PRI_stime "), block:%" PRId64 "(%" PRI_stime ")\n", > - data->lock_cnt, data->time_hold, data->block_cnt, data->time_block); > + printk("cpu=%u\n", cpu); > + printk(" lock:%" PRIu64 "(%" PRI_stime "), block:%" PRIu64 "(%" PRI_stime ")\n", > + data->lock_cnt, data->time_hold, (uint64_t)data->block_cnt, I think I know why the cast is suddenly / unexpectedly needed, but imo such wants stating in the description, when generally we aim at avoiding casts where possible. > --- a/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h > +++ b/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h > @@ -76,13 +76,19 @@ union lock_debug { }; > */ > > struct spinlock; > +/* Temporary hack until a dedicated struct rspinlock is existing. */ > +#define rspinlock spinlock > > struct lock_profile { > struct lock_profile *next; /* forward link */ > const char *name; /* lock name */ > - struct spinlock *lock; /* the lock itself */ > + union { > + struct spinlock *lock; /* the lock itself */ > + struct rspinlock *rlock; /* the recursive lock itself */ > + }; _LOCK_PROFILE() wants to initialize this field, unconditionally using .lock. While I expect that problem to be taken care of in one of the later patches, use of the macro won't work anymore with this union in use with very old gcc that formally we still support. While a road to generally raising the baseline requirements is still pretty unclear to me, an option might be to require (and document) that to enable DEBUG_LOCK_PROFILE somewhat newer gcc needs using. > uint64_t lock_cnt; /* # of complete locking ops */ > - uint64_t block_cnt; /* # of complete wait for lock */ > + uint64_t block_cnt:63; /* # of complete wait for lock */ > + uint64_t is_rlock:1; /* use rlock pointer */ bool? Jan