Re: [PATCH 03/20] x86/ticketlock: Use C for __ticket_spin_unlock

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 11/13/2010 02:05 AM, Américo Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 10:59:44AM -0400, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>  * On PPro SMP or if we are using OOSTORE, we use a locked operation to unlock
>>  * (PPro errata 66, 92)
>>  */
>> -# define UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX LOCK_PREFIX
>> +static __always_inline void __ticket_unlock_release(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
>> +{
>> +	if (sizeof(lock->tickets.head) == sizeof(u8))
>> +		asm (LOCK_PREFIX "incb %0"
>> +		     : "+m" (lock->tickets.head) : : "memory");
>> +	else
>> +		asm (LOCK_PREFIX "incw %0"
>> +		     : "+m" (lock->tickets.head) : : "memory");
> This 'if/else' really should be done with #ifdef, even though
> the compiler may be smart enough to remove it.

No, we depend on if/else with constant arguments doing the right thing
all over the kernel.  It is always preferable to use it instead of
#ifdef where possible, so that the two branches of code are always
subjected to compiler checking, even if they're not being used.

>> +
>> +}
>> #else
>> -# define UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX
>> +static __always_inline void __ticket_unlock_release(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
>> +{
>> +	barrier();
>> +	lock->tickets.head++;
>> +	barrier();
> The second barrier() is not needed.

Agreed.  It gets removed in a later patch.

    J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/