From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Stephan Diestelhorst <stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>,
Attilio Rao <attilio.rao@citrix.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Xen Devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC V7 3/12] x86/ticketlock: collapse a layer of functions
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 01:43:25 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120419201322.5411.7158.sendpatchset@codeblue> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120419201209.5411.43877.sendpatchset@codeblue>
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>
Now that the paravirtualization layer doesn't exist at the spinlock
level any more, we can collapse the __ticket_ functions into the arch_
functions.
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>
Tested-by: Attilio Rao <attilio.rao@citrix.com>
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h | 35 +++++------------------------------
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
index 3e47608..ee4bbd4 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ static __always_inline void __ticket_unlock_kick(struct arch_spinlock *lock,
* in the high part, because a wide xadd increment of the low part would carry
* up and contaminate the high part.
*/
-static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_lock(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
+static __always_inline void arch_spin_lock(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
{
register struct __raw_tickets inc = { .tail = 1 };
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_lock(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
out: barrier(); /* make sure nothing creeps before the lock is taken */
}
-static __always_inline int __ticket_spin_trylock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
+static __always_inline int arch_spin_trylock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
arch_spinlock_t old, new;
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ static __always_inline int __ticket_spin_trylock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
return cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail, old.head_tail, new.head_tail) == old.head_tail;
}
-static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
+static __always_inline void arch_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
__ticket_t next = lock->tickets.head + 1;
@@ -121,46 +121,21 @@ static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
__ticket_unlock_kick(lock, next);
}
-static inline int __ticket_spin_is_locked(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
+static inline int arch_spin_is_locked(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
struct __raw_tickets tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
return tmp.tail != tmp.head;
}
-static inline int __ticket_spin_is_contended(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
+static inline int arch_spin_is_contended(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
struct __raw_tickets tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
return (__ticket_t)(tmp.tail - tmp.head) > 1;
}
-
-static inline int arch_spin_is_locked(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- return __ticket_spin_is_locked(lock);
-}
-
-static inline int arch_spin_is_contended(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- return __ticket_spin_is_contended(lock);
-}
#define arch_spin_is_contended arch_spin_is_contended
-static __always_inline void arch_spin_lock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- __ticket_spin_lock(lock);
-}
-
-static __always_inline int arch_spin_trylock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- return __ticket_spin_trylock(lock);
-}
-
-static __always_inline void arch_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- __ticket_spin_unlock(lock);
-}
-
static __always_inline void arch_spin_lock_flags(arch_spinlock_t *lock,
unsigned long flags)
{
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-19 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-19 20:12 [PATCH RFC V7 0/12] Paravirtualized ticketlocks Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:12 ` [PATCH RFC V7 1/12] x86/spinlock: replace pv spinlocks with pv ticketlocks Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:12 ` [PATCH RFC V7 2/12] x86/ticketlock: don't inline _spin_unlock when using paravirt spinlocks Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:13 ` Raghavendra K T [this message]
2012-04-19 20:13 ` [PATCH RFC V7 4/12] xen: defer spinlock setup until boot CPU setup Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:14 ` [PATCH RFC V7 5/12] xen/pvticketlock: Xen implementation for PV ticket locks Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:14 ` [PATCH RFC V7 6/12] xen/pvticketlocks: add xen_nopvspin parameter to disable xen pv ticketlocks Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:15 ` [PATCH RFC V7 7/12] x86/pvticketlock: use callee-save for lock_spinning Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:15 ` [PATCH RFC V7 8/12] x86/pvticketlock: when paravirtualizing ticket locks, increment by 2 Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:15 ` [PATCH RFC V7 9/12] split out rate limiting from jump_label.h Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:16 ` [PATCH RFC V7 10/12] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:16 ` [PATCH RFC V7 11/12] xen/pvticketlock: allow interrupts to be enabled while blocking Raghavendra K T
2012-04-19 20:17 ` [PATCH RFC V7 12/12] xen: enable PV ticketlocks on HVM Xen Raghavendra K T
2012-05-01 12:50 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC V7 0/12] Paravirtualized ticketlocks Ian Campbell
2012-05-01 13:04 ` Raghavendra K T
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=20120419201322.5411.7158.sendpatchset@codeblue \
--to=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=attilio.rao@citrix.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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).