From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753195Ab3AXKMY (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 05:12:24 -0500 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:25504 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752923Ab3AXKMR (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 05:12:17 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,528,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="251672843" Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:13:05 +0800 From: Yuanhan Liu To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mutex: use spin_[un]lock instead of arch_spin_[un]lock Message-ID: <20130124101305.GE12678@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <1359019365-23646-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> <1359019365-23646-2-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> <20130124095807.GA26351@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130124095807.GA26351@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:58:07AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Yuanhan Liu wrote: > > > Use spin_[un]lock instead of arch_spin_[un]lock in mutex-debug.h so > > that we can collect the lock statistics of spin_lock_mutex from > > /proc/lock_stat. > > > > Cc: Ingo Molnar > > Signed-off-by: Yuanhan Liu > > --- > > kernel/mutex-debug.h | 4 ++-- > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/mutex-debug.h b/kernel/mutex-debug.h > > index 0799fd3..556c0bc 100644 > > --- a/kernel/mutex-debug.h > > +++ b/kernel/mutex-debug.h > > @@ -43,13 +43,13 @@ static inline void mutex_clear_owner(struct mutex *lock) > > \ > > DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(in_interrupt()); \ > > local_irq_save(flags); \ > > - arch_spin_lock(&(lock)->rlock.raw_lock);\ > > + spin_lock(lock); \ > > But in that case it could probably use the spin_lock_irqsave() > primitive, right? Right, in that case I should use spin_lock_irqsave. But one question, why we use spin_lock at kernel/mutex.h, while use 'local_irq_save(); arch_spin_lock' at kernel/mutex-debug.h? Shouldn't we keep it consistent? Say use spin_lock_irqsave? Thanks. --yliu > > > DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(l->magic != l); \ > > } while (0) > > > > #define spin_unlock_mutex(lock, flags) \ > > do { \ > > - arch_spin_unlock(&(lock)->rlock.raw_lock); \ > > + spin_unlock(lock); \ > > local_irq_restore(flags); \ > > preempt_check_resched(); \ > > And here spin_unlock_irqrestore(). > > Thanks, > > Ingo