Re: [PATCH -v6 01/13] futex: Cleanup variable names for futex_top_waiter()
From: Darren Hart
Date: Fri Mar 24 2017 - 17:11:54 EST
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:35:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> futex_top_waiter() returns the top-waiter on the pi_mutex. Assinging
> this to a variable 'match' totally obscures the code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Yup, still happy to see this one.
Reviewed-by: Darren Hart (VMware) <dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/futex.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/futex.c
> +++ b/kernel/futex.c
> @@ -1120,14 +1120,14 @@ static int attach_to_pi_owner(u32 uval,
> static int lookup_pi_state(u32 uval, struct futex_hash_bucket *hb,
> union futex_key *key, struct futex_pi_state **ps)
> {
> - struct futex_q *match = futex_top_waiter(hb, key);
> + struct futex_q *top_waiter = futex_top_waiter(hb, key);
>
> /*
> * If there is a waiter on that futex, validate it and
> * attach to the pi_state when the validation succeeds.
> */
> - if (match)
> - return attach_to_pi_state(uval, match->pi_state, ps);
> + if (top_waiter)
> + return attach_to_pi_state(uval, top_waiter->pi_state, ps);
>
> /*
> * We are the first waiter - try to look up the owner based on
> @@ -1174,7 +1174,7 @@ static int futex_lock_pi_atomic(u32 __us
> struct task_struct *task, int set_waiters)
> {
> u32 uval, newval, vpid = task_pid_vnr(task);
> - struct futex_q *match;
> + struct futex_q *top_waiter;
> int ret;
>
> /*
> @@ -1200,9 +1200,9 @@ static int futex_lock_pi_atomic(u32 __us
> * Lookup existing state first. If it exists, try to attach to
> * its pi_state.
> */
> - match = futex_top_waiter(hb, key);
> - if (match)
> - return attach_to_pi_state(uval, match->pi_state, ps);
> + top_waiter = futex_top_waiter(hb, key);
> + if (top_waiter)
> + return attach_to_pi_state(uval, top_waiter->pi_state, ps);
>
> /*
> * No waiter and user TID is 0. We are here because the
> @@ -1292,11 +1292,11 @@ static void mark_wake_futex(struct wake_
> q->lock_ptr = NULL;
> }
>
> -static int wake_futex_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 uval, struct futex_q *this,
> +static int wake_futex_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 uval, struct futex_q *top_waiter,
> struct futex_hash_bucket *hb)
> {
> struct task_struct *new_owner;
> - struct futex_pi_state *pi_state = this->pi_state;
> + struct futex_pi_state *pi_state = top_waiter->pi_state;
> u32 uninitialized_var(curval), newval;
> DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
> bool deboost;
> @@ -1317,11 +1317,11 @@ static int wake_futex_pi(u32 __user *uad
>
> /*
> * It is possible that the next waiter (the one that brought
> - * this owner to the kernel) timed out and is no longer
> + * top_waiter owner to the kernel) timed out and is no longer
> * waiting on the lock.
> */
> if (!new_owner)
> - new_owner = this->task;
> + new_owner = top_waiter->task;
>
> /*
> * We pass it to the next owner. The WAITERS bit is always
> @@ -2631,7 +2631,7 @@ static int futex_unlock_pi(u32 __user *u
> u32 uninitialized_var(curval), uval, vpid = task_pid_vnr(current);
> union futex_key key = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
> struct futex_hash_bucket *hb;
> - struct futex_q *match;
> + struct futex_q *top_waiter;
> int ret;
>
> retry:
> @@ -2655,9 +2655,9 @@ static int futex_unlock_pi(u32 __user *u
> * all and we at least want to know if user space fiddled
> * with the futex value instead of blindly unlocking.
> */
> - match = futex_top_waiter(hb, &key);
> - if (match) {
> - ret = wake_futex_pi(uaddr, uval, match, hb);
> + top_waiter = futex_top_waiter(hb, &key);
> + if (top_waiter) {
> + ret = wake_futex_pi(uaddr, uval, top_waiter, hb);
> /*
> * In case of success wake_futex_pi dropped the hash
> * bucket lock.
>
>
>
--
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center