Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] rfifolock: add recursive FIFO lock

[Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 12:05:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 09/10/2013 11:55, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
> > +    /* Take a ticket */
> > +    unsigned int ticket = r->tail++;
> > +
> > +    if (r->nesting > 0) {
> > +        if (qemu_thread_is_self(&r->owner_thread)) {
> > +            r->tail--; /* put ticket back, we're nesting */
> > +        } else {
> 
> ticket is dead in the "nested" path, why not move it (and the increment)
> directly after the else?

The increment cannot be moved because there are 3 cases:

1. Uncontended lock: r->tail++
2. Recursive lock: do not change tail
3. Wait for contended lock: r->tail++

Case #1 needs r->tail++ too.

I find this approach clearest:

if (r->nesting == 0) {
    /* Uncontended, just take a ticket */
    r->tail++;
} else if (qemu_thread_is_self(&r->owner_thread)) {
    /* Recursive lock, no need to take a ticket */
} else {
    /* Contended case, take a ticket and wait for it */
    unsigned int ticket = r->tail++;

    while (ticket != r->head) {
        ...
    }
}

There's also a shorter approach which collapses everything into a single
if statement, but I find the if expression a harder to understand:

if (r->nesting == 0 || !qemu_thread_is_self(&r->owner_thread)) {
    unsigned int ticket = r->tail++;
    while (ticket != r->head) {
        ...
    }
}

Any preferences?

Stefan