From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
josh@joshtriplett.org, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, niv@us.ibm.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
dhowells@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/13] sched: use lockdep-based checking on rcu_dereference()
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:48:03 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100214174803.GN7084@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1266142332.5273.415.camel@laptop>
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 11:12:12AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 16:00 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > + first = rcu_dereference_check(pid->tasks[type].first, rcu_read_lock_held() || lockdep_is_held(&tasklist_lock));
> > if (first)
> > result = hlist_entry(first, struct task_struct, pids[(type)].node);
> > }
>
> I've seen that particular combination a few times in this patch, would
> it make sense to create rcu_dereference_task()?
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> > index c535cc4..ad419d9 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> > @@ -645,6 +645,11 @@ static inline int cpu_of(struct rq *rq)
> > #endif
> > }
> >
> > +#define for_each_domain_rd(p) \
> > + rcu_dereference_check((p), \
> > + rcu_read_lock_sched_held() || \
> > + lockdep_is_held(&sched_domains_mutex))
> > +
>
> Would rcu_dereference_rd() not be a better name?
We are probably going to need per-subsystem name spaces, so how about
rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain()? Again, if agreeable, will send
updated patch stack.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
sched: better name for for_each_domain_rd
As suggested by Peter Ziljstra, make better choice of name
for for_each_domain_rd(), containing "rcu_dereference", given
that it is but a wrapper for rcu_dereference_check(). The name
rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain() does that and provides a separate
per-subsystem name space.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index ad419d9..478fc7d 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ static inline int cpu_of(struct rq *rq)
#endif
}
-#define for_each_domain_rd(p) \
+#define rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain(p) \
rcu_dereference_check((p), \
rcu_read_lock_sched_held() || \
lockdep_is_held(&sched_domains_mutex))
@@ -658,7 +658,7 @@ static inline int cpu_of(struct rq *rq)
* preempt-disabled sections.
*/
#define for_each_domain(cpu, __sd) \
- for (__sd = for_each_domain_rd(cpu_rq(cpu)->sd); __sd; __sd = __sd->parent)
+ for (__sd = rcu_dereference_check_sched_domain(cpu_rq(cpu)->sd); __sd; __sd = __sd->parent)
#define cpu_rq(cpu) (&per_cpu(runqueues, (cpu)))
#define this_rq() (&__get_cpu_var(runqueues))
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-14 17:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-12 0:00 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/13] rcu: add lockdep checking, doc update, dyntick GP acceleration Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/13] rcu: introduce lockdep-based checking to RCU read-side primitives Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/13] rcu: add lockdep-enabled variants of rcu_dereference() Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 4:13 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/13] rcu: integrate rcu_dereference_check() message into lockdep Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/13] rcu: disable lockdep checking in RCU list-traversal primitives Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/13] net: add checking to rcu_dereference() primitives Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 4:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-02-14 8:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-02-15 7:18 ` David Miller
2010-02-14 8:34 ` Michał Mirosław
2010-02-14 8:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/13] sched: use lockdep-based checking on rcu_dereference() Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-14 10:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-14 17:48 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/13] vfs: apply lockdep-based checking to rcu_dereference() uses Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-14 10:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-14 17:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/13] radix-tree: disable RCU lockdep checking in radix tree Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/13] idr: apply lockdep-based diagnostics to rcu_dereference() uses Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/13] security: apply lockdep-based checking " Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/13] rcu: documentation update for CONFIG_PROVE_RCU Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/13] rcu: fix citation of Mathieu's dissertation Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-12 0:00 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/13] rcu: accelerate grace period if last non-dynticked CPU Paul E. McKenney
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=20100214174803.GN7084@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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