From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
mingo@redhat.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, hpa@zytor.com,
cebbert@redhat.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/16] percpu: remove per_cpu__ prefix.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:24:39 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AD6EA57.6020105@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0910141026370.26476@gentwo.org>
(microblaze maintainer cc'd, hello)
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ extern void *per_cpu_init(void);
>> * On the positive side, using __ia64_per_cpu_var() instead of __get_cpu_var() is slightly
>> * more efficient.
>> */
>> -#define __ia64_per_cpu_var(var) per_cpu__##var
>> +#define __ia64_per_cpu_var(var) var
>
> IA64 could completely drop the macro? Tony?
Being discussed but I think we should just add sparse annotation there
instead.
>> diff --git a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h
>> index 61abbd2..ec89f2a 100644
>> --- a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h
>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h
>> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
>> * places
>> */
>>
>> -#define PER_CPU(var) per_cpu__##var
>> +#define PER_CPU(var) var
>
> Microblaze too.
This macro is used only in assemblies which wouldn't be covered by
sparse so in this case this patch series actually removes protection,
so I wasn't too sure about ripping the macro off. Any ideas what we
can do here? Just kill it?
>> +#define PER_CPU(var, reg) __percpu_mov_op $var, reg
>> +#define PER_CPU_VAR(var) var
>
> Drop X86 PER_CPU_VAR
No can do. SMP variant isn't null op.
>> -#define percpu_read(var) percpu_from_op("mov", per_cpu__##var, \
>> - "m" (per_cpu__##var))
>> -#define percpu_read_stable(var) percpu_from_op("mov", per_cpu__##var, \
>> - "p" (&per_cpu__##var))
>> -#define percpu_write(var, val) percpu_to_op("mov", per_cpu__##var, val)
>> -#define percpu_add(var, val) percpu_to_op("add", per_cpu__##var, val)
>> -#define percpu_sub(var, val) percpu_to_op("sub", per_cpu__##var, val)
>> -#define percpu_and(var, val) percpu_to_op("and", per_cpu__##var, val)
>> -#define percpu_or(var, val) percpu_to_op("or", per_cpu__##var, val)
>> -#define percpu_xor(var, val) percpu_to_op("xor", per_cpu__##var, val)
>> +#define percpu_read(var) percpu_from_op("mov", var, "m" (var))
>> +#define percpu_read_stable(var) percpu_from_op("mov", var, "p" (&(var)))
>> +#define percpu_write(var, val) percpu_to_op("mov", var, val)
>> +#define percpu_add(var, val) percpu_to_op("add", var, val)
>> +#define percpu_sub(var, val) percpu_to_op("sub", var, val)
>> +#define percpu_and(var, val) percpu_to_op("and", var, val)
>> +#define percpu_or(var, val) percpu_to_op("or", var, val)
>> +#define percpu_xor(var, val) percpu_to_op("xor", var, val)
>
> The percpu_xx definitions are now equal to __this_cpu_xx(). They could be
> dropped for the core.
Yeap, will do so with further patches.
>> #define __get_cpu_var(var) \
>> - (*SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(&per_cpu_var(var), my_cpu_offset))
>> + (*SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(&(var), my_cpu_offset))
>
> == this_cpu_read(var) or this_cpu_write(var, value)
>
>> #define __raw_get_cpu_var(var) \
>> - (*SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(&per_cpu_var(var), __my_cpu_offset))
>> + (*SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(&(var), __my_cpu_offset))
>
> == __this_cpu_read() or this_cpu_write(var, value)
>
> __raw? Combination of __ and raw? Can we clearly define what each means?
>
>> - typeof(per_cpu_var(var)) __tmp_var__; \
>> + typeof(var) __tmp_var__; \
>> __tmp_var__ = get_cpu_var(var); \
>> put_cpu_var(var); \
>> __tmp_var__; \
>
> == this_cpu_read(var)
For all of above comments, yeap, we definitely need to clean all these
up, but let's do that once sparse annotation is working.
> Great work. There is lots more possible cleanup work that could be done
> after this patch has merged.
>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-15 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-14 6:01 [RFC percpu#for-next] percpu: drop per_cpu__ prefix and add sparse annotations, take#2 Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 01/16] vmalloc: fix use of non-existent percpu variable in put_cpu_var() Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 15:06 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 9:10 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 02/16] percpu: make alloc_percpu() handle array types Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 03/16] percpu: remove some sparse warnings Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 14:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 04/16] percpu: make percpu symbols under kernel/ and mm/ unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 05/16] percpu: make percpu symbols in tracer unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 06/16] percpu: make percpu symbols in oprofile unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 07/16] percpu: make percpu symbols in cpufreq unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 08/16] percpu: make percpu symbols in xen unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 09/16] percpu: make percpu symbols in x86 unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:01 ` [PATCH 10/16] percpu: make percpu symbols in powerpc unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-27 3:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-10-14 6:02 ` [PATCH 11/16] percpu: make percpu symbols in ia64 unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:02 ` [PATCH 12/16] percpu: make misc percpu symbols unique Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:02 ` [PATCH 13/16] percpu: remove per_cpu__ prefix Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 14:36 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 16:42 ` Luck, Tony
2009-10-14 17:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-10-14 18:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 8:57 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 18:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 18:36 ` Luck, Tony
2009-10-14 18:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 8:51 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-16 16:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 9:24 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2009-10-16 6:04 ` Michal Simek
2009-10-18 2:58 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-19 13:41 ` Michal Simek
2009-10-29 11:11 ` Tejun Heo
2009-11-02 16:35 ` Michal Simek
2009-10-19 13:40 ` Michal Simek
2009-10-29 12:06 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:02 ` [PATCH 14/16] percpu: make access macros universal Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 14:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 9:27 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:02 ` [PATCH 15/16] percpu: add __percpu for sparse Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 6:02 ` [PATCH 16/16] percpu: make accessors check for percpu pointer in sparse Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 14:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 9:08 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-29 13:40 ` [RFC percpu#for-next] percpu: drop per_cpu__ prefix and add sparse annotations, take#2 Tejun Heo
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=4AD6EA57.6020105@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).