From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] locking/percpu-rwsem: Annotate rwsem ownership transfer by setting RWSEM_OWNER_UNKNOWN
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 17:30:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <65b6a078-a063-dc9b-d2de-ec7d37831cba@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180515212130.GA12204@bombadil.infradead.org>
On 05/15/2018 05:21 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 02:45:12PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 05/15/2018 02:02 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:58:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 01:38:04PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>>> +/*
>>>>> + * Owner value to indicate the rwsem's owner is not currently known.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +#define RWSEM_OWNER_UNKNOWN ((struct task_struct *)-1)
>>>> It might be nice to comment that this works and relies on having that
>>>> ANON_OWNER bit set.
>>> I'd rather change the definition to be ((struct task_struct *)2)
>>> otherwise this is both reader-owned and anonymously-owned which doesn't
>>> make much sense.
>> Thinking about it a bit more. I can actually just use one special bit
>> (bit 0) to designate an unknown owner. So for a reader-owned lock, it is
>> just owner == 1 as the owners are unknown for a reader owned lock. For a
>> lock owned by an unknown writer, it is (owner & 1) && (owner != 1). That
>> will justify the use of -1L and save bit 1 for future extension.
> To quote from your patch:
>
> - * In essence, the owner field now has the following 3 states:
> + * In essence, the owner field now has the following 4 states:
> * 1) 0
> * - lock is free or the owner hasn't set the field yet
> * 2) RWSEM_READER_OWNED
> * - lock is currently or previously owned by readers (lock is free
> * or not set by owner yet)
> - * 3) Other non-zero value
> - * - a writer owns the lock
> + * 3) RWSEM_ANONYMOUSLY_OWNED
> + * - lock is owned by an anonymous writer, so spinning on the lock
> + * owner should be disabled.
> + * 4) Other non-zero value
> + * - a writer owns the lock and other writers can spin on the lock owner.
>
> I'd leave these as 0, 1, 2, other. It's not really worth messing with
> testing bits.
>
> Actually, if you change them to all be values -- s/NULL/RWSEM_NO_OWNER/
>
> then you could define them as:
>
> RWSEM_READER_OWNED 0
> RWSEM_ANON_OWNED 1
> RWSEM_NO_OWNER 2
>
> and rwsem_should_spin() is just sem->owner > 1.
I would like to have owner equal to NULL if it is not locked. If it is
locked, the owner can be used to get information about the owner. So I
am not sure your scheme will work.
Cheers,
Longman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-15 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-15 17:38 [PATCH v3 0/2] locking/rwsem: Fix DEBUG_RWSEM warning from thaw_super() Waiman Long
2018-05-15 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] locking/rwsem: Add a new RWSEM_ANONYMOUSLY_OWNED flag Waiman Long
2018-05-15 17:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-15 17:48 ` Waiman Long
2018-05-15 17:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-15 17:52 ` Waiman Long
2018-05-15 17:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-15 17:56 ` Waiman Long
2018-05-15 18:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-15 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] locking/percpu-rwsem: Annotate rwsem ownership transfer by setting RWSEM_OWNER_UNKNOWN Waiman Long
2018-05-15 17:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-15 18:02 ` Waiman Long
2018-05-15 18:05 ` Amir Goldstein
2018-05-15 18:45 ` Waiman Long
2018-05-15 18:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-15 18:35 ` Waiman Long
2018-05-15 18:02 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-15 18:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-15 18:45 ` Waiman Long
2018-05-15 21:21 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-15 21:30 ` Waiman Long [this message]
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=65b6a078-a063-dc9b-d2de-ec7d37831cba@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--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 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).