Re: [PATCH 1/5] locking: Introduce range reader/writer lock

[Davidlohr Bueso]

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> > +#define __RANGE_RWLOCK_INITIALIZER(start, last) {	\
> > +		.node = {			\
> > +			.start = (start)	\
> > +			,.last = (last)		\
> > +		}				\
> > +	}
>
> Hi Davidlohr,
>
> This macro doesn't expand correctly because the field name ".start" is
> replaced by the start parameter. Should rather be :
>
> #define __RANGE_RWLOCK_INITIALIZER(__start, __last) {	\
> 		.node = {			\
> 			.start = (__start)	\
> 			,.last = (__last)	\
> 		}				\
> 	}
>
> By the way, should the other fields set as in __range_rwlock_init() ?

Indeed.

> > +/*
> > + * lock for writing
> > + */
> > +void range_write_lock(struct range_rwlock_tree *tree, struct range_rwlock *lock);
> > +int range_write_lock_interruptible(struct range_rwlock_tree *tree,
> > +				   struct range_rwlock *lock);
> > +int range_write_lock_killable(struct range_rwlock_tree *tree,
> > +			      struct range_rwlock *lock);
> > +int range_read_trylock(struct range_rwlock_tree *tree, struct range_rwlock *lock);
>             ^^^^
>      range_write_trylock(...) isn't it ?

Duh, yeah.

I'll wait to see if there are any more concerns and send a v2 with your corrections.

Thanks,
Davidlohr