public inbox for linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Chubb <peterc@gelato.unsw.edu.au>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Darren Williams <dsw@gelato.unsw.edu.au>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Ia64 Linux <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1]
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:23:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050120162309.GB14002@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501200812300.8178@ppc970.osdl.org>


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:

> what the _heck_ is that "atomic_read((atomic_t *)&(x)->lock)", and why is 
> it not just a "(int)(x)->lock" instead?
> 
> So I think it would be much better as
> 
> 	#define read_can_lock(x) ((int)(x)->lock > 0)
> 
> which seems simple and straightforward.

right. Replace patch #4 with:

--- linux/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h.orig
+++ linux/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h
@@ -198,21 +198,33 @@ typedef struct {
 
 #define RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED (rwlock_t) { RW_LOCK_BIAS RWLOCK_MAGIC_INIT }
 
-#define rwlock_init(x)	do { *(x) = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED; } while(0)
+static inline void rwlock_init(rwlock_t *rw)
+{
+	*rw = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
+}
 
-#define rwlock_is_locked(x) ((x)->lock != RW_LOCK_BIAS)
+static inline int rwlock_is_locked(rwlock_t *rw)
+{
+	return rw->lock != RW_LOCK_BIAS;
+}
 
 /**
  * read_can_lock - would read_trylock() succeed?
  * @lock: the rwlock in question.
  */
-#define read_can_lock(x) (atomic_read((atomic_t *)&(x)->lock) > 0)
+static inline int read_can_lock(rwlock_t *rw)
+{
+	return rw->lock > 0;
+}
 
 /**
  * write_can_lock - would write_trylock() succeed?
  * @lock: the rwlock in question.
  */
-#define write_can_lock(x) ((x)->lock = RW_LOCK_BIAS)
+static inline int write_can_lock(rwlock_t *rw)
+{
+	return rw->lock = RW_LOCK_BIAS;
+}
 
 /*
  * On x86, we implement read-write locks as a 32-bit counter
@@ -241,8 +253,16 @@ static inline void _raw_write_lock(rwloc
 	__build_write_lock(rw, "__write_lock_failed");
 }
 
-#define _raw_read_unlock(rw)		asm volatile("lock ; incl %0" :"=m" ((rw)->lock) : : "memory")
-#define _raw_write_unlock(rw)	asm volatile("lock ; addl $" RW_LOCK_BIAS_STR ",%0":"=m" ((rw)->lock) : : "memory")
+static inline void _raw_read_unlock(rwlock_t *rw)
+{
+	asm volatile("lock ; incl %0" :"=m" (rw->lock) : : "memory");
+}
+
+static inline void _raw_write_unlock(rwlock_t *rw)
+{
+	asm volatile("lock ; addl $" RW_LOCK_BIAS_STR
+				",%0":"=m" (rw->lock) : : "memory");
+}
 
 static inline int _raw_read_trylock(rwlock_t *lock)
 {


  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-20 16:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20050117055044.GA3514@taniwha.stupidest.org>
     [not found] ` <20050116230922.7274f9a2.akpm@osdl.org>
     [not found]   ` <20050117143301.GA10341@elte.hu>
2005-01-18  1:47     ` Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch Darren Williams
2005-01-18  4:28       ` Darren Williams
2005-01-18  7:08         ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-19  0:14       ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  8:04         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19  9:18           ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  9:20             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19 21:43               ` Paul Mackerras
2005-01-20  2:34                 ` [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1] Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  3:01                   ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  3:18                     ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  3:33                       ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  8:59                       ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-20 13:04                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 15:51                         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:08                           ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:11                             ` [patch 2/3] spinlock fix #2: generalize [spin|rw]lock yielding Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:12                               ` [patch 3/3] spinlock fix #3: type-checking spinlock primitives, x86 Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:14                                 ` [patch] stricter type-checking rwlock " Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:16                                   ` [patch] minor spinlock cleanups Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:31                             ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:40                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 17:48                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:53                                   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:22                                     ` [patch, BK-curr] nonintrusive spin-polling loop in kernel/spinlock.c Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:25                                       ` [patch, BK-curr] rename 'lock' to 'slock' in asm-i386/spinlock.h Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 23:45                                       ` [patch, BK-curr] nonintrusive spin-polling loop in kernel/spinlock.c Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:44                               ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:59                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:47                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:57                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:05                       ` [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1] Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:20                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:18                   ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:23                     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2005-01-20 17:30                       ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:38                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:28                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20  5:49                 ` Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch Grant Grundler

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=20050120162309.GB14002@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=cw@f00f.org \
    --cc=dsw@gelato.unsw.edu.au \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jbarnes@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterc@gelato.unsw.edu.au \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    --cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
    /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