From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>
Subject: [patch 2/5] seqlock: Use seqcount for seqlock
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 11:44:23 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120314170918.467626549@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120314170736.617746873@linutronix.de>
[-- Attachment #1: seqlock-use-seqcount.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 5468 bytes --]
No point in having different implementations for the same thing.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
include/linux/seqlock.h | 176 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
1 file changed, 93 insertions(+), 83 deletions(-)
Index: tip/include/linux/seqlock.h
===================================================================
--- tip.orig/include/linux/seqlock.h
+++ tip/include/linux/seqlock.h
@@ -30,81 +30,12 @@
#include <linux/preempt.h>
#include <asm/processor.h>
-typedef struct {
- unsigned sequence;
- spinlock_t lock;
-} seqlock_t;
-
-/*
- * These macros triggered gcc-3.x compile-time problems. We think these are
- * OK now. Be cautious.
- */
-#define __SEQLOCK_UNLOCKED(lockname) \
- { 0, __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(lockname) }
-
-#define seqlock_init(x) \
- do { \
- (x)->sequence = 0; \
- spin_lock_init(&(x)->lock); \
- } while (0)
-
-#define DEFINE_SEQLOCK(x) \
- seqlock_t x = __SEQLOCK_UNLOCKED(x)
-
-/* Lock out other writers and update the count.
- * Acts like a normal spin_lock/unlock.
- * Don't need preempt_disable() because that is in the spin_lock already.
- */
-static inline void write_seqlock(seqlock_t *sl)
-{
- spin_lock(&sl->lock);
- ++sl->sequence;
- smp_wmb();
-}
-
-static inline void write_sequnlock(seqlock_t *sl)
-{
- smp_wmb();
- sl->sequence++;
- spin_unlock(&sl->lock);
-}
-
-/* Start of read calculation -- fetch last complete writer token */
-static __always_inline unsigned read_seqbegin(const seqlock_t *sl)
-{
- unsigned ret;
-
-repeat:
- ret = ACCESS_ONCE(sl->sequence);
- if (unlikely(ret & 1)) {
- cpu_relax();
- goto repeat;
- }
- smp_rmb();
-
- return ret;
-}
-
-/*
- * Test if reader processed invalid data.
- *
- * If sequence value changed then writer changed data while in section.
- */
-static __always_inline int read_seqretry(const seqlock_t *sl, unsigned start)
-{
- smp_rmb();
-
- return unlikely(sl->sequence != start);
-}
-
-
/*
* Version using sequence counter only.
* This can be used when code has its own mutex protecting the
* updating starting before the write_seqcountbeqin() and ending
* after the write_seqcount_end().
*/
-
typedef struct seqcount {
unsigned sequence;
} seqcount_t;
@@ -186,7 +117,6 @@ static inline int __read_seqcount_retry(
static inline int read_seqcount_retry(const seqcount_t *s, unsigned start)
{
smp_rmb();
-
return __read_seqcount_retry(s, start);
}
@@ -220,21 +150,101 @@ static inline void write_seqcount_barrie
s->sequence+=2;
}
+typedef struct {
+ struct seqcount seqcount;
+ spinlock_t lock;
+} seqlock_t;
+
/*
- * Possible sw/hw IRQ protected versions of the interfaces.
+ * These macros triggered gcc-3.x compile-time problems. We think these are
+ * OK now. Be cautious.
*/
+#define __SEQLOCK_UNLOCKED(lockname) \
+ { \
+ .seqcount = SEQCNT_ZERO, \
+ .lock = __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(lockname) \
+ }
+
+#define seqlock_init(x) \
+ do { \
+ seqcount_init(&(x)->seqcount); \
+ spin_lock_init(&(x)->lock); \
+ } while (0)
+
+#define DEFINE_SEQLOCK(x) \
+ seqlock_t x = __SEQLOCK_UNLOCKED(x)
+
+/*
+ * Read side functions for starting and finalizing a read side section.
+ */
+static inline unsigned read_seqbegin(const seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ return read_seqcount_begin(&sl->seqcount);
+}
+
+static inline unsigned read_seqretry(const seqlock_t *sl, unsigned start)
+{
+ return read_seqcount_retry(&sl->seqcount, start);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Lock out other writers and update the count.
+ * Acts like a normal spin_lock/unlock.
+ * Don't need preempt_disable() because that is in the spin_lock already.
+ */
+static inline void write_seqlock(seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ spin_lock(&sl->lock);
+ write_seqcount_begin(&sl->seqcount);
+}
+
+static inline void write_sequnlock(seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ write_seqcount_end(&sl->seqcount);
+ spin_unlock(&sl->lock);
+}
+
+static inline void write_seqlock_bh(seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ spin_lock_bh(&sl->lock);
+ write_seqcount_begin(&sl->seqcount);
+}
+
+static inline void write_sequnlock_bh(seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ write_seqcount_end(&sl->seqcount);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&sl->lock);
+}
+
+static inline void write_seqlock_irq(seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ spin_lock_irq(&sl->lock);
+ write_seqcount_begin(&sl->seqcount);
+}
+
+static inline void write_sequnlock_irq(seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ write_seqcount_end(&sl->seqcount);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&sl->lock);
+}
+
+static inline unsigned long __write_seqlock_irqsave(seqlock_t *sl)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&sl->lock, flags);
+ write_seqcount_begin(&sl->seqcount);
+ return flags;
+}
+
#define write_seqlock_irqsave(lock, flags) \
- do { local_irq_save(flags); write_seqlock(lock); } while (0)
-#define write_seqlock_irq(lock) \
- do { local_irq_disable(); write_seqlock(lock); } while (0)
-#define write_seqlock_bh(lock) \
- do { local_bh_disable(); write_seqlock(lock); } while (0)
-
-#define write_sequnlock_irqrestore(lock, flags) \
- do { write_sequnlock(lock); local_irq_restore(flags); } while(0)
-#define write_sequnlock_irq(lock) \
- do { write_sequnlock(lock); local_irq_enable(); } while(0)
-#define write_sequnlock_bh(lock) \
- do { write_sequnlock(lock); local_bh_enable(); } while(0)
+ do { flags = __write_seqlock_irqsave(lock); } while (0)
+
+static inline void
+write_sequnlock_irqrestore(seqlock_t *sl, unsigned long flags)
+{
+ write_seqcount_end(&sl->seqcount);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sl->lock, flags);
+}
#endif /* __LINUX_SEQLOCK_H */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-15 11:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-15 11:44 [patch 0/5] seqlock consolidation Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 11:44 ` [patch 1/5] seqlock: Remove unused functions Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 16:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-03-15 17:39 ` Al Viro
2012-03-15 17:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 11:44 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2012-03-15 11:44 ` [patch 3/5] seqlock: Provide seq_spin_* functions Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 11:44 ` [patch 4/5] fs: fs_struct use seqlock Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 11:44 ` [patch 5/5] fs: Use seqlock in struct dentry Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 12:21 ` [patch 0/5] seqlock consolidation Al Viro
2012-03-15 12:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 17:43 ` Al Viro
2012-03-15 17:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 18:39 ` Al Viro
2012-03-15 19:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-15 20:42 ` Al Viro
2012-03-15 22:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120314170918.467626549@linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®