public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 12/19] lockdep: further simplify mark_lock_irq() helpers
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:37:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090122174053.255718311@chello.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20090122173701.674448070@chello.nl

[-- Attachment #1: lockdep-mark_irq2.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4451 bytes --]

take away another parameter

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
---
 kernel/lockdep.c |   47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/kernel/lockdep.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/lockdep.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/lockdep.c
@@ -2025,14 +2025,35 @@ static inline const char *state_rname(en
 	return state_rnames[bit >> 2];
 }
 
+static int exclusive_bit(int new_bit)
+{
+	/*
+	 * USED_IN
+	 * USED_IN_READ
+	 * ENABLED
+	 * ENABLED_READ
+	 *
+	 * bit 0 - write/read
+	 * bit 1 - used_in/enabled
+	 * bit 2+  state
+	 */
+
+	int state = new_bit & ~3;
+	int dir = new_bit & 2;
+
+	return state | (dir ^ 2);
+}
+
 static int
 mark_lock_irq_used_in(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
-		      int new_bit, int excl_bit,
+		      int new_bit,
 		      int (*verbose)(struct lock_class *class))
 {
 	const char *name = state_name(new_bit);
 	const char *rname = state_rname(new_bit);
 
+	int excl_bit = exclusive_bit(new_bit);
+
 	if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, excl_bit))
 		return 0;
 	if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, excl_bit + 1))
@@ -2059,12 +2080,14 @@ mark_lock_irq_used_in(struct task_struct
 
 static int
 mark_lock_irq_used_in_read(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
-			   int new_bit, int excl_bit,
+			   int new_bit,
 			   int (*verbose)(struct lock_class *class))
 {
 	const char *name = state_name(new_bit);
 	const char *rname = state_rname(new_bit);
 
+	int excl_bit = exclusive_bit(new_bit);
+
 	if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, excl_bit))
 		return 0;
 	/*
@@ -2081,12 +2104,14 @@ mark_lock_irq_used_in_read(struct task_s
 
 static int
 mark_lock_irq_enabled(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
-		      int new_bit, int excl_bit,
+		      int new_bit,
 		      int (*verbose)(struct lock_class *class))
 {
 	const char *name = state_name(new_bit);
 	const char *rname = state_rname(new_bit);
 
+	int excl_bit = exclusive_bit(new_bit);
+
 	if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, excl_bit))
 		return 0;
 	if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, excl_bit + 1))
@@ -2114,12 +2139,14 @@ mark_lock_irq_enabled(struct task_struct
 
 static int
 mark_lock_irq_enabled_read(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *this,
-			   int new_bit, int excl_bit,
+			   int new_bit,
 			   int (*verbose)(struct lock_class *class))
 {
 	const char *name = state_name(new_bit);
 	const char *rname = state_rname(new_bit);
 
+	int excl_bit = exclusive_bit(new_bit);
+
 	if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, excl_bit))
 		return 0;
 #if STRICT_READ_CHECKS
@@ -2144,54 +2171,42 @@ static int mark_lock_irq(struct task_str
 	switch(new_bit) {
 	case LOCK_USED_IN_HARDIRQ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_used_in(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ,
 				hardirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_USED_IN_SOFTIRQ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_used_in(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ,
 				softirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS:
 		return mark_lock_irq_used_in(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS,
 				reclaim_verbose);
 
 	case LOCK_USED_IN_HARDIRQ_READ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_used_in_read(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ,
 				hardirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_USED_IN_SOFTIRQ_READ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_used_in_read(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ,
 				softirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_used_in_read(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS,
 				reclaim_verbose);
 
 	case LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_enabled(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_USED_IN_HARDIRQ,
 				hardirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_enabled(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_USED_IN_SOFTIRQ,
 				softirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS:
 		return mark_lock_irq_enabled(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS,
 				reclaim_verbose);
 
 	case LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ_READ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_enabled_read(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_USED_IN_HARDIRQ,
 				hardirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ_READ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_enabled_read(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_USED_IN_SOFTIRQ,
 				softirq_verbose);
 	case LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
 		return mark_lock_irq_enabled_read(curr, this, new_bit,
-				LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS,
 				reclaim_verbose);
 
 	default:

-- 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-01-22 17:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-22 17:37 [RFC PATCH 00/19] lockdep series Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 01/19] lockdep: annotate reclaim context (__GFP_NOFS) Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 19:40   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 20:29     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-23  7:33       ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-23  8:00         ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-23 15:08           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 02/19] lockdep: sanitize bit names Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 03/19] lockdep: sanitize reclaim " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 04/19] lockdep: lockdep_states.h Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 05/19] lockdep: simplify mark_held_locks Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 06/19] lockdep: simplify mark_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 07/19] lockdep: move state bit definitions around Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 08/19] lockdep: generate the state bit definitions Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 09/19] lockdep: generate usage strings Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 10/19] lockdep: split up mark_lock_irq() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 11/19] lockdep: simplify the mark_lock_irq() helpers Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 13/19] simplify mark_lock_irq() helpers #3 Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 14/19] lockdep: merge the _READ mark_lock_irq() helpers Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 15/19] lockdep: merge the !_READ " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 16/19] lockdep: fully reduce mark_lock_irq() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 17/19] lockdep: simplify get_user_chars() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 18/19] lockdep: get_user_chars() redo Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 19/19] lockdep: simplify check_prev_add_irq() Peter Zijlstra

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=20090122174053.255718311@chello.nl \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.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