From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/12] sched/wait: Add a waitqueue helper for fully exclusive priority waiters
Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 13:57:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aCzsnXPQ0TtKtqu9@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250520191723.GI16434@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, May 20, 2025, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 11:55:08AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/wait.c b/kernel/sched/wait.c
> > index 51e38f5f4701..03252badb8e8 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/wait.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/wait.c
> > @@ -47,6 +47,24 @@ void add_wait_queue_priority(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head, struct wait_queue_
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(add_wait_queue_priority);
> >
> > +int add_wait_queue_priority_exclusive(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head,
> > + struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry)
> > +{
> > + struct list_head *head = &wq_head->head;
> > +
> > + wq_entry->flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE | WQ_FLAG_PRIORITY;
> > +
> > + guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&wq_head->lock);
> > +
> > + if (!list_empty(head) &&
> > + (list_first_entry(head, typeof(*wq_entry), entry)->flags & WQ_FLAG_PRIORITY))
> > + return -EBUSY;
> > +
> > + list_add(&wq_entry->entry, head);
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(add_wait_queue_priority_exclusive);
>
> add_wait_queue_priority() is a GPL export, leading me to believe the
> whole priority thing is _GPL only, should we maintain that?
Oh, yes, definitely. Simply a goof.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-20 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-19 18:55 [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM: Make irqfd registration globally unique Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] KVM: Use a local struct to do the initial vfs_poll() on an irqfd Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] KVM: Acquire SCRU lock outside of irqfds.lock during assignment Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] KVM: Initialize irqfd waitqueue callback when adding to the queue Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] KVM: Add irqfd to KVM's list via the vfs_poll() callback Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] KVM: Add irqfd to eventfd's waitqueue while holding irqfds.lock Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] sched/wait: Add a waitqueue helper for fully exclusive priority waiters Sean Christopherson
2025-05-20 19:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-20 20:57 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] KVM: Disallow binding multiple irqfds to an eventfd with a priority waiter Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] sched/wait: Drop WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE from add_wait_queue_priority() Sean Christopherson
2025-05-20 19:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-20 22:20 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-21 11:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-21 14:44 ` Michael Kelley
2025-05-21 15:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-21 13:22 ` Jürgen Groß
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] KVM: Drop sanity check that per-VM list of irqfds is unique Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] KVM: selftests: Assert that eventfd() succeeds in Xen shinfo test Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] KVM: selftests: Add utilities to create eventfds and do KVM_IRQFD Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] KVM: selftests: Add a KVM_IRQFD test to verify uniqueness requirements Sean Christopherson
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=aCzsnXPQ0TtKtqu9@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).