Re: [PATCH v4 13/27] lib: add errseq_t type and infrastructure for handling it

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 11:49:16AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> +++ b/lib/errseq.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,199 @@
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/bug.h>
> +#include <linux/atomic.h>
> +#include <linux/errseq.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * An errseq_t is a way of recording errors in one place, and allowing any
> + * number of "subscribers" to tell whether it has changed since an arbitrary
> + * time of their choosing.

You use the word "time" in several places in the documentation, but I think
it's clearer to say "sampling point" or "sample", since you're not using jiffies
or nanoseconds.  For example, I'd phrase this paragraph this way:

 * An errseq_t is a way of recording errors in one place, and allowing any
 * number of "subscribers" to tell whether it has changed since they last
 * sampled it.

> + * The general idea is for consumers to sample an errseq_t value at a
> + * particular point in time. Later, that value can be used to tell whether any
> + * new errors have occurred since that time.

 * The general idea is for consumers to sample an errseq_t value.  That
 * value can be used to tell whether any new errors have occurred since
 * the last time it was sampled.

> +/* The "ones" bit for the counter */

Maybe "The lowest bit of the counter"?

> +/**
> + * errseq_check - has an error occurred since a particular point in time?

"has an error occurred since the last time it was sampled"

> +/**
> + * errseq_check_and_advance - check an errseq_t and advance it to the current value
> + * @eseq: pointer to value being checked reported

"value being checked reported"?

> +int errseq_check_and_advance(errseq_t *eseq, errseq_t *since)
> +{
> +	int err = 0;
> +	errseq_t old, new;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Most callers will want to use the inline wrapper to check this,
> +	 * so that the common case of no error is handled without needing
> +	 * to lock.
> +	 */
> +	old = READ_ONCE(*eseq);
> +	if (old != *since) {
> +		/*
> +		 * Set the flag and try to swap it into place if it has
> +		 * changed.
> +		 *
> +		 * We don't care about the outcome of the swap here. If the
> +		 * swap doesn't occur, then it has either been updated by a
> +		 * writer who is bumping the seq count anyway, or another
> +		 * reader who is just setting the "seen" flag. Either outcome
> +		 * is OK, and we can advance "since" and return an error based
> +		 * on what we have.
> +		 */
> +		new = old | ERRSEQ_SEEN;
> +		if (new != old)
> +			cmpxchg(eseq, old, new);
> +		*since = new;
> +		err = -(new & MAX_ERRNO);
> +	}

I probably need to read through the patchset some more to understand this.
Naively, surely "since" should be updated to the current value of 'eseq'
if we failed the cmpxchg()?

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>