Re: [PATCH RFC V6 2/11] x86/ticketlock: don't inline _spin_unlockwhen using paravirt spinlocks

[Raghavendra K T]

On 03/21/2012 10:43 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Raghavendra K T
> <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge<jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The code size expands somewhat, and its probably better to just call
> > a function rather than inline it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge<jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T<raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   arch/x86/Kconfig     |    3 +++
> >   kernel/Kconfig.locks |    2 +-
> >   2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > index 5bed94e..10c28ec 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > @@ -623,6 +623,9 @@ config PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
> >
> >           If you are unsure how to answer this question, answer N.
> >
> > +config ARCH_NOINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK
> > +       def_bool PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
> > +
> >   config PARAVIRT_CLOCK
> >         bool
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/Kconfig.locks b/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> > index 5068e2a..584637b 100644
> > --- a/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> > +++ b/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ config INLINE_SPIN_LOCK_IRQSAVE
> >                  ARCH_INLINE_SPIN_LOCK_IRQSAVE
> >
> >   config INLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK
> > -       def_bool !DEBUG_SPINLOCK&&  (!PREEMPT || ARCH_INLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK)
> > +       def_bool !DEBUG_SPINLOCK&&  (!PREEMPT || ARCH_INLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK)&&  !ARCH_NOINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK
> >
> >   config INLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK_BH
> >         def_bool !DEBUG_SPINLOCK&&  ARCH_INLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK_BH
>
> Ugh. This is getting really ugly.

Agree that it had become longer.

> Can we just fix it by
>   - getting rid of INLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK entirely
>
>   - replacing it with UNINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK instead with the reverse
> meaning, and no "def_bool" at all, just a simple
>
>          config UNINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK
>                  bool
>
>   - make the various people who want to uninline the spinlocks (like
> spinlock debugging, paravirt etc) all just do
>
>          select UNINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK

I just posted  https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/3/22/94. Please let me know
if that looks better.
And this patch should now become something like
---
diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index 5bed94e..2666b7d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -613,6 +613,7 @@ config PARAVIRT
 config PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
	 bool "Paravirtualization layer for spinlocks"
	 depends on PARAVIRT && SMP && EXPERIMENTAL
+	 select UNINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK
	 ---help---
	   Paravirtualized spinlocks allow a pvops backend to replace the
	   spinlock implementation with something virtualization-friendly

--
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/