From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8EE13B8D4A; Thu, 5 Mar 2026 15:46:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.17 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772725591; cv=none; b=tcDk3xTVqCVu0ZJ4igCXXveCkQ2K3SBFo2xpAD3lwZi/K1XoptSu3nDfdjhvpKxLSpe/auNk15iNI7gg+bbpj+qMXPog7RutUwzrfXQN6j7PD9lEgTOsWMTs83XjC/e2h20L+vamHgtPAyo9wfMpO6elo6qkaimwsn5dbTJ/fP0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772725591; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mCZXEa6zlsJn111KrUykBgY88sLG5x451RjP6zlmprQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HFOFoMPdAV7jFsbpqva4m0OtuLp3ZFKKqF7KoUd6b+U53CWVyn320qk5WCaaGt/ZRyAKlR9GjPANZVahdEzq5bivfLJ5uLJM8B8ottNyQF6SblHMQOcH/fkFPkzxGft08QNFWSNP15eYWqaocYDxQf3djpnM1lyaHg76pZIN+SQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.17 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org Received: from omf17.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4AB9B5A3F; Thu, 5 Mar 2026 15:46:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5F5C918; Thu, 5 Mar 2026 15:46:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2026 10:47:03 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Dmitry Ilvokhin , Dennis Zhou , Tejun Heo , Christoph Lameter , Masami Hiramatsu , Mathieu Desnoyers , Ingo Molnar , Will Deacon , Boqun Feng , Waiman Long , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] locking/percpu-rwsem: Extract __percpu_up_read_slowpath() Message-ID: <20260305104703.2a1e8151@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20260304220223.GS606826@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <6b1f1521ca186d5c402a65619d8f30fe83b93bf6.1772642407.git.d@ilvokhin.com> <20260304220223.GS606826@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.20.0git84 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5F5C918 X-Stat-Signature: 4hnw4cfe9w88jmegwzf81bu64kp1gurp X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX1+HpKi6jg9NxZeYvZzvI5zrlCwxsTFUgfk= X-HE-Tag: 1772725584-160659 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1/vo6T3T+yuIek1bKKSMPqW9ClvKUbD/u9KLUN2zrHj7XRTbFeVkRtaSFZUOkw0539RDqNm6B207m1bk35iuxf4EGUTuw+XDhzWoTOU8tj3v9jYqdnTLTT7VTiqb4HXVp4wE7ZDusaVw70vI16AfZWUaKQPfB3VZF3sm0LMDmMBzHshvIh7eZRl9Sm5PXhFImNF/H+YoC2hp8sDcCRc4CkqevvjO+kSmbfHywomSMfO3lSy5PqSg6i7dSStj6O5q+He0it6WCjhMI/77NpkQXNdYrCifzUVrEknKsDZEaNkAo5avvJcKA85+SP9HlWuTo1GcfqwE6LBAXHndQewr22fChGGaLE8ghkvpTN+ymuojV3y960dI67n On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 23:02:23 +0100 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h b/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h > > index c8cb010d655e..89506895365c 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h > > +++ b/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h > > @@ -107,6 +107,8 @@ static inline bool percpu_down_read_trylock(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *sem) > > return ret; > > } > > > > +void __percpu_up_read_slowpath(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *sem); > > + > > extern for consistency with all the other declarations in this header. I wonder if a cleanup patch should be added to remove the "extern" from the other functions, as that tends to be the way things are going (hch just recommended it elsewhere). > > s/_slowpath//, the corresponding down function also doesn't have > _slowpath on. > > > static inline void percpu_up_read(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *sem) > > { > > rwsem_release(&sem->dep_map, _RET_IP_); And since "slowpath" is more descriptive (and used in the rtmutex code), should that be added too? -- Steve