From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (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 119C8379EC4; Thu, 5 Mar 2026 16:06:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.92.199 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772726773; cv=none; b=XErk9SR0AqNw89OJxpNpe0TSgw+EuI8f7XwO89fdjXPb4rvHUA3EHQbXR/aDQ/5oQxRv7G/+f1kK6OWVSUPIaYQCjGcDPeI5OQRlMzYMA52hyzTZ80gZ4uZ8I8yck9QNk3ctQhOLQvkFOzIy4E2y3Xh1FubUnTjm/8g+N/ZqpWU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772726773; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Z3x+Se9yIuwlUrw5IJht45f+3n/jmFguEMA2zfjsXPA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cHv/uvrAMahLl4BYMAsep0hFpBuBzVcCIA0FQcsZs/kGp+SaiKDQUNa4Gg34j0yzP3Wf9/G+Vf0gChbQKLmWK+HZHcOaGIh2Cj4U/Wb7gxdM0pVmaltnYSzkQgvWjBMM9O7QBV57WDNMnF7W75FFYAT+dzkO7nfYxFxqYz5qwYA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=G48/mJtC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.92.199 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="G48/mJtC" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=desiato.20200630; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=yoXLVExaeD40rMm6BLEsNzbF/cVQ2Kh2LQ9L0d5YO00=; b=G48/mJtCY4pqf4sNMBVKTL4lmv LbtVcnZiyUmaBFfgSm6dkg7BW7aG+WGFTW2qN2xc/0+Qch05f4jp/nzx+N8dKAM2Q56QErHm63Yym jXoeQQu3Lx+HUMsyF/kknumyDtn3MaLldp1kF9wqQoB8SEzZeO8VtpzocDTC8f8JUPGc0zd9PQPFs BTBPAk4HV3x7SEI+FRhEO7DJtEXVPr50Qdv7cx3S+TVPoXb7VO98ursViRK/1xiTfwDz3b2GFCaWl 8xwyr4LAmRRPc6u72ab28Ni5FJjOlhqeRd3BTZhNsbLAJiDeLm1ceXTDPHbaCwHI09XM2IcKuylBK MpJNh4JA==; Received: from 77-249-17-252.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl ([77.249.17.252] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vyBD5-00000007A4B-0rha; Thu, 05 Mar 2026 16:05:59 +0000 Received: by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 97952300182; Thu, 05 Mar 2026 17:05:58 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2026 17:05:58 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Steven Rostedt 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: <20260305160558.GD2277644@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <6b1f1521ca186d5c402a65619d8f30fe83b93bf6.1772642407.git.d@ilvokhin.com> <20260304220223.GS606826@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20260305104703.2a1e8151@gandalf.local.home> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260305104703.2a1e8151@gandalf.local.home> On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 10:47:03AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > 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). Well, I rather like the extern. But yeah, I know hch does not agree. > > > > 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? It already has __ prefix, no point in making the name even longer for no real benefit.