From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:39108 "EHLO galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726889AbgHCT1j (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Aug 2020 15:27:39 -0400 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] s390: convert to GENERIC_VDSO In-Reply-To: <20200803184428.GA3973@osiris> References: <20200803055645.79042-1-svens@linux.ibm.com> <20200803055645.79042-3-svens@linux.ibm.com> <87ft93ncaa.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <87a6zbn29n.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200803184428.GA3973@osiris> Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 21:27:36 +0200 Message-ID: <873653mswn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Heiko Carstens Cc: Sven Schnelle , Vincenzo Frascino , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Heiko Carstens writes: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 06:05:24PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> +/** >> + * vdso_update_begin - Start of a VDSO update section >> + * >> + * Allows architecture code to safely update the architecture specific VDSO >> + * data. >> + */ >> +void vdso_update_begin(void) >> +{ >> + struct vdso_data *vdata = __arch_get_k_vdso_data(); >> + >> + raw_spin_lock(&timekeeper_lock); >> + vdso_write_begin(vdata); >> +} > > I would assume that this only works if vdso_update_begin() is called > with irqs disabled, otherwise it could deadlock, no? Yes. > Maybe something like: > > void vdso_update_begin(unsigned long *flags) > { > struct vdso_data *vdata = __arch_get_k_vdso_data(); > > raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&timekeeper_lock, *flags); > vdso_write_begin(vdata); Shudder. Why not returning flags? > } > > void vdso_update_end(unsigned long *flags) Ditto, why pointer and not value? > { > struct vdso_data *vdata = __arch_get_k_vdso_data(); > > vdso_write_end(vdata); > __arch_sync_vdso_data(vdata); > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&timekeeper_lock, *flags); > } > > ? Just wondering. Thought about that briefly, but then hated the flags thing and delegated it to the caller. Lockdep will yell if that lock is taken with interrupts enabled :) But aside of the pointer vs. value thing, I'm fine with doing it in the functions. Thanks, tglx