Re: [PATCH v6 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access

From: Alistair Popple
Date: Mon Mar 22 2021 - 05:28:18 EST


On Monday, 15 March 2021 6:51:13 PM AEDT Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > - /*XXX: atomic? */
> > - return (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3) -
> > - (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3);
> > + /* Atomic access (2) has highest priority */
> > + return (-1*(fa->access == 2) + (fa->access == 0 || fa->access == 3)) -
> > + (-1*(fb->access == 2) + (fb->access == 0 || fb->access == 3));
>
> This looks really unreabable. If the magic values 0, 2 and 3 had names
> it might become a little more understadable, then factor the duplicated
> calculation of the priority value into a helper and we'll have code that
> mere humans can understand..

Fair enough, will add some definitions for the magic values.

> > + mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> > + if (mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> > + notifier_seq)) {
> > + mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > + break;
> > + }
>
> This looks good, why not:
>
> mutex_lock(&svmm->mutex);
> if (!mmu_interval_read_retry(&notifier->notifier,
> notifier_seq))
> break;
> mutex_unlock(&svmm->mutex);
> }

I had copied that from nouveau_range_fault() but this suggestion is better.
Will update, thanks for looking.