Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1262192 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-04 11:40 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-11-04 13:20 +0100 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2015-11-04 11:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de> - 2015-11-04 13:20 +0100
| From | Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 11:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait) implementation |
| Message-ID | <qr3DX-7Fs-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> +
> +extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q);
> +extern void swake_up_all(struct swait_queue_head *q);
> +extern void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q);
I intentionally named these functions swait_wake* in my initial
implementation for two reasons:
- typoing wake_up vs. swake_up only emits a compiler warning and does
not break the build
- I really prefer new infrastructure to have a consistent prefix
which reflects the "subsystem". That's simpler to read and simpler
to grep for.
> +extern void __prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
> +extern void prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
> +extern long prepare_to_swait_event(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
> +
> +extern void __finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
> +extern void finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
Can we please go with the original names?
swait_prepare()
swait_prepare_locked()
swait_finish()
swait_finish_locked()
Hmm?
> +#define swait_event(wq, condition) \
Here we have the same swait vs. wait problem as above. So either we
come up with a slightly different name or have an explicit type check
in __swait_event event.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-04 13:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qr5cJ-j6-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1262192 |
On 11/04/2015 11:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>> +
>> +extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q);
>> +extern void swake_up_all(struct swait_queue_head *q);
>> +extern void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q);
>
> I intentionally named these functions swait_wake* in my initial
> implementation for two reasons:
>
> - typoing wake_up vs. swake_up only emits a compiler warning and does
> not break the build
I played a bit around on this and came up with the patch below. The type
check results in an error.
> - I really prefer new infrastructure to have a consistent prefix
> which reflects the "subsystem". That's simpler to read and simpler
> to grep for.
>
>> +extern void __prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
>> +extern void prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
>> +extern long prepare_to_swait_event(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
>> +
>> +extern void __finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
>> +extern void finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
>
> Can we please go with the original names?
>
> swait_prepare()
> swait_prepare_locked()
> swait_finish()
> swait_finish_locked()
>
> Hmm?
I defer to Peter :)
>> +#define swait_event(wq, condition) \
>
> Here we have the same swait vs. wait problem as above. So either we
> come up with a slightly different name or have an explicit type check
> in __swait_event event.
What about something like this:
diff --git a/include/linux/swait.h b/include/linux/swait.h
index c1f9c62..f59369d 100644
--- a/include/linux/swait.h
+++ b/include/linux/swait.h
@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@
#include <linux/spinlock.h>
#include <asm/current.h>
+#define compiletime_assert_same_type(a, b) \
+ compiletime_assert(__same_type(a, b), "Need to match correct type");
+
/*
* Simple wait queues
*
@@ -66,6 +69,7 @@ extern void __init_swait_queue_head(struct swait_queue_head *q, const char *name
#define init_swait_queue_head(q) \
do { \
static struct lock_class_key __key; \
+ compiletime_assert_same_type(struct swait_queue_head *, q); \
__init_swait_queue_head((q), #q, &__key); \
} while (0)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web