Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1443320
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian |
| Date | 2016-07-14 11:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rULhE-7Tt-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rM0SB-4FY-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <rUyu5-7yz-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <rUJzb-6C2-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 03:44:42PM +0800, xinhui wrote:
> >OK, so I poked at this a bit and I ended up with the below; but now
> >qrwlock and qspinlock are inconsistent; although I suspect qspinlock is
> >similarly busted wrt endian muck.
> >
> >Not sure what to do..
> >
> Lets talk about the qspinlock.
>
> for x86, We has already assumed that ->locked sit at the low 8 bits, as is
> smp_store_release((u8 *)lock, 0);
Right, true on x86 though :-) I noticed your PPC patches have a +3 in
there conditional on __BIG_ENDIAN.
> Then we can do a favor, export ->locked but other fields as reserved.
> say
>
> struct __qspinlock_unlcok_interface {/* what name is better?*/
> #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> u8 locked;
> u8 reserved[3]; /* do not touch it, internally use only */
> #else
> u8 reserved[3];
> u8 locked;
> #endif
> };
Right, maybe, although something like:
static inline u8 *__qspinlock_lock_byte(struct qspinlock *lock)
{
return (u8 *)lock + 3 * IS_BUILTIN(__BIG_ENDIAN);
}
static inline u8 *__qrwlock_write_byte(struct qrwlock *lock)
{
return (u8 *)lock + 3 * IS_BUILTIN(__BIG_ENDIAN);
}
is shorter?
> > /*
> >+ * Writer states & reader shift and bias.
> >+ *
> >+ * | +0 | +1 | +2 | +3 |
> >+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
> >+ * LE | 12 | 34 | 56 | 78 | 0x12345678
> >+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
> >+ * BE | 78 | 56 | 34 | 12 | 0x12345678
> >+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
> >+ * | wr | rd |
> >+ * +----+----+----+----+
> >+ *
> > */
>
> very clearly. :)
I did one for the qspinlock code too..
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
index b2caec7315af..9191dc454e96 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
@@ -120,6 +120,23 @@ static inline __pure struct mcs_spinlock *decode_tail(u32 tail)
*
* This internal structure is also used by the set_locked function which
* is not restricted to _Q_PENDING_BITS == 8.
+ *
+ * | +0 | +1 | +2 | +3 |
+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
+ * LE | 78 | 56 | 34 | 12 | val = 0x12345678
+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
+ * LE | 34 | 12 | locked_pending = 0x1234
+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
+ * | L | P | tail |
+ * +----+----+----+----+
+ *
+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
+ * BE | 12 | 34 | 56 | 78 | val = 0x12345678
+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
+ * BE | 12 | 34 | locked_pending = 0x1234
+ * ----+----+----+----+----+
+ * | tail | P | L |
+ * +----+----+----+----+
*/
struct __qspinlock {
union {
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-07-13 22:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-07-13 22:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-07-14 09:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-07-14 11:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-07-14 11:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 02:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] locking/qrwlock: Let qrwlock has same layout regardless of the endian panxinhui <xinhui@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-07-15 08:30 +0200
csiph-web