From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1756194AbcHWVFN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 23 Aug 2016 17:05:13 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:35640 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1755294AbcHWVFK (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 23 Aug 2016 17:05:10 -0400
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:03:54 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jason Low <jason.low2@hpe.com>,
        Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>, Terry Rudd <terry.rudd@hpe.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>, Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] locking/mutex: Rework mutex::owner
Message-ID: <20160823210354.GY10153@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20160823124617.015645861@infradead.org>
 <20160823124856.763266868@infradead.org>
 <57BCAA48.6050202@hpe.com>
 <1471985566.2916.18.camel@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <1471985566.2916.18.camel@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 01:52:46PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-08-23 at 15:55 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > On 08/23/2016 08:46 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > I have 2 more comments about the code.
> > 1) There are a couple of places where you only use 0x3 in mutex.c. They 
> > should be replaced by the symbolic name instead.
> 
> May be easier to read if (owner & 0x3) and
> (owner & ~0x3) are changed to something like 
> _owner_flag(owner) and _owner_task(owner).

Yes that would work. Something like the below..

Note the ';' in the last "-" line that currently ensures we always take
the slow path.

----

--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -55,7 +55,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__mutex_init);
 #define MUTEX_FLAG_WAITERS	0x01
 #define MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF	0x02
 
-#define MUTEX_FLAG_ALL		0x03
+#define MUTEX_FLAGS		0x03
+
+static inline struct task_struct *__owner_task(unsigned long owner)
+{
+	return (struct task_struct *)(owner & ~MUTEX_FLAGS);
+}
+
+static inline unsigned long __owner_flags(unsigned long owner)
+{
+	return owner & MUTEX_FLAGS;
+}
 
 /*
  * Atomically try to take the lock when it is available
@@ -65,7 +75,7 @@ static inline bool __mutex_trylock(struc
 	unsigned long owner, new_owner;
 
 	owner = atomic_long_read(&lock->owner);
-	if (owner & ~0x03)
+	if (__owner_task(owner))
 		return false;
 
 	new_owner = owner | (unsigned long)current;
@@ -466,14 +476,14 @@ void __sched mutex_unlock(struct mutex *
 		if (owner & MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF)
 			break;
 
-		old = atomic_long_cmpxchg_release(&lock->owner, owner, owner & 0x03);
+		old = atomic_long_cmpxchg_release(&lock->owner, owner, __owner_flags(owner));
 		if (old == owner)
 			break;
 
 		owner = old;
 	}
 
-	if (owner & 0x03);
+	if (__owner_flags(owner))
 		__mutex_unlock_slowpath(lock, owner);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(mutex_unlock);