Re: static key arrays?

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:45:35AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> Hi Peter, Jason, all,
> 
> Per the recent type-safe API changes, it's no longer easy to generate
> an array of static keys. I was planning to do that for a set of very
> unlikely debug options.
> 
> It sounds like you're planning to remove the previous API entirely at
> some point, so I'm wondering if you've given any thought to this
> possibility.

If possible I'd kill static_key_{true,false}() and
static_key_slow_{inc,dec}. Not sure how much more makes sense, the new
interface builds on parts of the old stuff.

> I briefly played with the idea of adding a macro for that, but the
> necessary "REPEAT(n, d)" macro for the initialisation becomes ugly
> pretty quickly and, afaict, needs to have enough macros for the maximum
> expected numbers.
> 
> For the case I was looking at it's static_key_false so a zero
> -initialized array would be sufficient, but that can't be done easily
> with a static_key_true.

As long as its all the same type it shouldn't be too hard;

struct static_key_false array[n] = { STATIC_KEY_FALSE_INIT, };

or something like that.

The scheduler has an array of these things that has different types;
which if going to be even more interesting. I'm not quite sure what to
do there, but I think it'll end up relying on the fact that both types
share the same base (struct static_key) and involve a lot of type
casting :-)

--
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/