Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates

From: Jason Baron
Date: Fri Feb 11 2011 - 17:28:40 EST


On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 05:20:25PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra (peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 16:13 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > >
> > > Thoughts ?
> >
> > #if defined(CC_HAVE_ASM_GOTO) && defined(CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL)
> > +
> > +struct jump_label_key {
> > + void *ptr;
> > +};
> >
> > struct jump_label_entry {
> > struct hlist_node hlist;
> > struct jump_entry *table;
> > - int nr_entries;
> > /* hang modules off here */
> > struct hlist_head modules;
> > unsigned long key;
> > + u32 nr_entries;
> > + int refcount;
> > };
> >
> > #else
> >
> > +struct jump_label_key {
> > + int state;
> > +};
> >
> > #endif
> >
> > So why can't we make that jump_label_entry::refcount and
> > jump_label_key::state an atomic_t and be done with it?
> >
> > Then the enabled case uses if (atomic_inc_return(&key->ptr->refcount) ==
> > 1), and the disabled atomic_inc(&key->state).
> >
>
> OK, by "enabled" you mean #if defined(CC_HAVE_ASM_GOTO) &&
> defined(CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL), and "disabled", the #else.
>
> I guess the only downside is the extra volatile for the atomic_read for
> the fallback case, which is not really much of problem realistically
> speaking: anyway, the volatile is a good thing to have in the fallback
> case to force the compiler to re-read the variable. Let's go with your
> idea.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mathieu
>

ok, I'll try and re-spin the interface based around atomic_t, if we are all
agreed...there was also a circular dependency issue with atomic.h including
kernel.h which included jump_label.h, and that was why we had a separate,
jump_label_ref.h header file, but hopefully I can be resolve that in a clean
way.

thanks,

-Jason
--
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/