netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>,
	<linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>,
	<cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	<devel-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	<kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>,
	<netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>,
	David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>,
	Joe Perches <joe-6d6DIl74uiNBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] decrement static keys on real destroy time
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 16:11:07 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120522161107.4ab99a68.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120522154610.f2f9b78e.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:46:10 -0700
Andrew Morton <akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> > +static inline bool memcg_proto_active(struct cg_proto *cg_proto)
> > +{
> > +	return cg_proto->flags & (1 << MEMCG_SOCK_ACTIVE);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool memcg_proto_activated(struct cg_proto *cg_proto)
> > +{
> > +	return cg_proto->flags & (1 << MEMCG_SOCK_ACTIVATED);
> > +}
> 
> Here, we're open-coding kinda-test_bit().  Why do that?  These flags are
> modified with set_bit() and friends, so we should read them with the
> matching test_bit()?
> 
> Also, these bool-returning functions will return values other than 0
> and 1.  That probably works OK and I don't know what the C standards
> and implementations do about this.  But it seems unclean and slightly
> risky to have a "bool" value of 32!  Converting these functions to use
> test_bit() fixes this - test_bit() returns only 0 or 1.
> 
> test_bit() is slightly more expensive than the above.  If this is
> considered to be an issue then I guess we could continue to use this
> approach.  But I do think a code comment is needed, explaining and
> justifying the unusual decision to bypass the bitops API.  Also these
> functions should tell the truth and return an "int" type.

Joe corrected (and informed) me:

: 6.3.1.2p1:
: 
: "When any scalar value is converted to _Bool, the result is 0
: if the value compares equal to 0; otherwise, the result is 1."

So the above functions will be given compiler-generated scalar-to-boolean
conversion.

test_bit() already does internal scalar-to-boolean conversion.  The
compiler doesn't know that, so if we convert the above functions to use
test_bit(), we'll end up performing scalar-to-boolean-to-boolean
conversion, which is dumb.

I assume that a way of fixing this is to change test_bit() to return
bool type.  That's a bit scary.

A less scary way would be to add a new

	bool test_bit_bool(int nr, const unsigned long *addr);

which internally calls test_bit() but somehow avoids the
compiler-generated conversion of the test_bit() return value into a
bool.  I haven't actually thought of a way of doing this ;)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-05-22 23:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-22 10:25 [PATCH v6 0/2] fix static_key disabling problem in memcg Glauber Costa
2012-05-22 10:25 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] Always free struct memcg through schedule_work() Glauber Costa
2012-05-22 10:25 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] decrement static keys on real destroy time Glauber Costa
     [not found]   ` <1337682339-21282-3-git-send-email-glommer-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
2012-05-22 22:46     ` Andrew Morton
     [not found]       ` <20120522154610.f2f9b78e.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2012-05-22 23:11         ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-05-23  9:16         ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-23 20:33           ` Andrew Morton

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=20120522161107.4ab99a68.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm-de/tnxtf+jlsfhdxvbkv3wd2fqjk+8+b@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=devel-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=glommer-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=joe-6d6DIl74uiNBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=lizefan-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=mhocko-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
    /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).