From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:12:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5639F63C.9040609@bmw-carit.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1511041124530.4032@nanos>
On 11/04/2015 11:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> +
>> +extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q);
>> +extern void swake_up_all(struct swait_queue_head *q);
>> +extern void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q);
>
> I intentionally named these functions swait_wake* in my initial
> implementation for two reasons:
>
> - typoing wake_up vs. swake_up only emits a compiler warning and does
> not break the build
I played a bit around on this and came up with the patch below. The type
check results in an error.
> - I really prefer new infrastructure to have a consistent prefix
> which reflects the "subsystem". That's simpler to read and simpler
> to grep for.
>
>> +extern void __prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
>> +extern void prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
>> +extern long prepare_to_swait_event(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
>> +
>> +extern void __finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
>> +extern void finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
>
> Can we please go with the original names?
>
> swait_prepare()
> swait_prepare_locked()
> swait_finish()
> swait_finish_locked()
>
> Hmm?
I defer to Peter :)
>> +#define swait_event(wq, condition) \
>
> Here we have the same swait vs. wait problem as above. So either we
> come up with a slightly different name or have an explicit type check
> in __swait_event event.
What about something like this:
diff --git a/include/linux/swait.h b/include/linux/swait.h
index c1f9c62..f59369d 100644
--- a/include/linux/swait.h
+++ b/include/linux/swait.h
@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@
#include <linux/spinlock.h>
#include <asm/current.h>
+#define compiletime_assert_same_type(a, b) \
+ compiletime_assert(__same_type(a, b), "Need to match correct type");
+
/*
* Simple wait queues
*
@@ -66,6 +69,7 @@ extern void __init_swait_queue_head(struct swait_queue_head *q, const char *name
#define init_swait_queue_head(q) \
do { \
static struct lock_class_key __key; \
+ compiletime_assert_same_type(struct swait_queue_head *, q); \
__init_swait_queue_head((q), #q, &__key); \
} while (0)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-04 12:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-20 7:28 [PATCH v3 0/4] Simple wait queue support Daniel Wagner
2015-10-20 7:28 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation Daniel Wagner
2015-10-26 12:04 ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-26 12:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-26 12:59 ` Daniel Wagner
2015-10-26 13:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-26 14:19 ` Boqun Feng
2015-11-04 10:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-11-04 12:12 ` Daniel Wagner [this message]
2015-11-18 10:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-18 15:07 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-10-20 7:28 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] KVM: use simple waitqueue for vcpu->wq Daniel Wagner
2015-10-20 13:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-20 14:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-20 15:40 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-20 16:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-21 8:55 ` Paul Mackerras
2015-10-21 9:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-21 9:10 ` Paul Mackerras
2015-10-21 9:24 ` Paul Mackerras
2015-10-21 11:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-23 11:51 ` Daniel Wagner
2015-10-20 7:28 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] rcu: Do not call rcu_nocb_gp_cleanup() while holding rnp->lock Daniel Wagner
2015-10-20 7:28 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] rcu: use simple wait queues where possible in rcutree Daniel Wagner
2015-10-25 20:10 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] Simple wait queue support Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-26 6:34 ` Daniel Wagner
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=5639F63C.9040609@bmw-carit.de \
--to=daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).