Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 1/8] header/cleanup.h: Add _init_args to DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_COND)
Date: Tue,  4 Feb 2025 14:22:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250204132238.162608-2-dev@lankhorst.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250204132238.162608-1-dev@lankhorst.se>

This makes it possible to use the lock guards for guards that need
extra arguments.

I've been attempting to add a guard to xe_force_wake handling, but that
required an extra argument specifying the domain. For nested spinlock
handling, it could also be beneficial to be able to do something like
this.

For example:
DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1_COND(spinlock_irqsave, _nested,
			 spin_lock_irqsave_nested(_T->lock, _T->flags, nest),
			 unsigned nest);

guard(spinlock_irqsave_nested, &lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);

The first optional argument in DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1 is now used for the struct members,
the remainder goes to init_args to allow the same usage in the base case..

I'm abusing the preprocessor to add an extra meaning to the first optional
argument is done by creating a __DO_DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1, and passing
__VA_ARGS__ not ##__VA_ARGS__ to it to ensure _struct_members is empty
when not passed explicitly.

Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
---
 include/linux/cleanup.h | 30 +++++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/cleanup.h b/include/linux/cleanup.h
index ec00e3f7af2b3..dbaf02447f206 100644
--- a/include/linux/cleanup.h
+++ b/include/linux/cleanup.h
@@ -349,19 +349,23 @@ _label:									\
  * locks that don't have a native type (eg. RCU, preempt) or those that need a
  * 'fat' pointer (eg. spin_lock_irqsave).
  *
- * DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(name, lock, unlock, ...)
- * DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(name, type, lock, unlock, ...)
- * DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1_COND(name, ext, condlock)
+ * DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(name, lock, unlock, _lock_members...)
+ * DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(name, type, lock, unlock, (opt)_lock_members, _init_args...)
+ * DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1_COND(name, ext, condlock, _init_args...)
  *
  * will result in the following type:
  *
  *   typedef struct {
  *	type *lock;		// 'type := void' for the _0 variant
- *	__VA_ARGS__;
+ *	_lock_members;		// use ; as separator to add multiple members
  *   } class_##name##_t;
  *
  * As above, both _lock and _unlock are statements, except this time '_T' will
  * be a pointer to the above struct.
+ *
+ * For DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1 and DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1_COND, it adds all
+ * _init_args as local variables available to the lock statement.
+ * They need to be passed to all guard() functions as extra argument.
  */
 
 #define __DEFINE_UNLOCK_GUARD(_name, _type, _unlock, ...)		\
@@ -381,8 +385,8 @@ static inline void *class_##_name##_lock_ptr(class_##_name##_t *_T)	\
 }
 
 
-#define __DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock)			\
-static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##_constructor(_type *l)	\
+#define __DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock, ...)			\
+static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##_constructor(_type *l, ##__VA_ARGS__)	\
 {									\
 	class_##_name##_t _t = { .lock = l }, *_T = &_t;		\
 	_lock;								\
@@ -398,23 +402,27 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##_constructor(void)	\
 	return _t;							\
 }
 
-#define DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock, _unlock, ...)		\
+#define __DO_DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock, _unlock, _lock_members, _init_args...) \
 __DEFINE_CLASS_IS_CONDITIONAL(_name, false);				\
-__DEFINE_UNLOCK_GUARD(_name, _type, _unlock, __VA_ARGS__)		\
-__DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock)
+__DEFINE_UNLOCK_GUARD(_name, _type, _unlock, _lock_members)		\
+__DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock, ##_init_args)
+
+/* Call __DO_DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1 here because of the 2 optional arguments */
+#define DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock, _unlock, ...)		\
+	__DO_DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock, _unlock, __VA_ARGS__)
 
 #define DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(_name, _lock, _unlock, ...)			\
 __DEFINE_CLASS_IS_CONDITIONAL(_name, false);				\
 __DEFINE_UNLOCK_GUARD(_name, void, _unlock, __VA_ARGS__)		\
 __DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(_name, _lock)
 
-#define DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1_COND(_name, _ext, _condlock)		\
+#define DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1_COND(_name, _ext, _condlock, ...)		\
 	__DEFINE_CLASS_IS_CONDITIONAL(_name##_ext, true);		\
 	EXTEND_CLASS(_name, _ext,					\
 		     ({ class_##_name##_t _t = { .lock = l }, *_T = &_t;\
 		        if (_T->lock && !(_condlock)) _T->lock = NULL;	\
 			_t; }),						\
-		     typeof_member(class_##_name##_t, lock) l)		\
+		     typeof_member(class_##_name##_t, lock) l, ##__VA_ARGS__)		\
 	static inline void * class_##_name##_ext##_lock_ptr(class_##_name##_t *_T) \
 	{ return class_##_name##_lock_ptr(_T); }
 
-- 
2.47.1


  reply	other threads:[~2025-02-04 13:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-04 13:22 [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 0/8] drm/xe: Convert xe_force_wake calls to guard helpers Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 13:22 ` Maarten Lankhorst [this message]
2025-02-04 13:22 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 2/8] drm/xe/gt: Unify xe_hw_fence_irq_finish() calls Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 15:20   ` Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-04 13:22 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 3/8] drm/xe: Add scoped guards for xe_force_wake Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 15:28   ` Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-04 16:30   ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-02-04 22:28     ` Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 22:49       ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-02-04 13:22 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 4/8] drm/xe: Add xe_force_wake_get_all Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 13:22 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 5/8] drm/xe/coredump: Use guard helpers for xe_force_wake Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 15:40   ` Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-04 13:22 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 6/8] drm/xe/gsc: Use guard helper for xe_gsc_print_info Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 13:22 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 7/8] drm/xe/vram: Use xe_force_wake guard helper Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 13:22 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 8/8] drm/xe/gt: Convert to xe_force_wake guard helpers Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-04 15:21 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe: Convert xe_force_wake calls to " Patchwork
2025-02-04 15:21 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2025-02-04 15:22 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-02-04 15:38 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2025-02-04 15:41 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2025-02-04 15:42 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2025-02-04 17:40 ` [PATCH-resent-to-correct-ml 0/8] " David Lechner
2025-02-05 20:11   ` Maarten Lankhorst
2025-02-05  6:12 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork

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=20250204132238.162608-2-dev@lankhorst.se \
    --to=dev@lankhorst.se \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox