From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] locking/mutex: Use mutex flags macro instead of hard code value
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 13:07:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190729110727.GB31398@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1564397578-28423-2-git-send-email-mojha@codeaurora.org>
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 04:22:58PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> Let's use the mutex flag macro(which got moved from mutex.c
> to linux/mutex.h in the last patch) instead of hard code
> value which was used in __mutex_owner().
>
> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>
> ---
> include/linux/mutex.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/mutex.h b/include/linux/mutex.h
> index 79b28be..c3833ba 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mutex.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mutex.h
> @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ struct mutex {
> */
> static inline struct task_struct *__mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock)
> {
> - return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~0x07);
> + return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~MUTEX_FLAGS);
> }
I would _much_ rather move __mutex_owner() out of line, you're exposing
far too much stuff.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-29 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-29 10:52 [PATCH 1/2] locking/mutex: Move mutex flag macros to linux/mutex.h Mukesh Ojha
2019-07-29 10:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] locking/mutex: Use mutex flags macro instead of hard code value Mukesh Ojha
2019-07-29 11:07 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-07-30 7:53 ` Mukesh Ojha
2019-07-30 8:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-30 12:40 ` Mukesh Ojha
2019-07-30 16:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-30 16:25 ` Mukesh Ojha
2019-07-30 15:49 ` [PATCH 1/2 v2] locking/mutex: Make __mutex_owner static to mutex.c Mukesh Ojha
2019-07-30 15:49 ` [PATCH 2/2 v2] locking/mutex: Use mutex flags macro instead of hard code value Mukesh Ojha
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=20190729110727.GB31398@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mojha@codeaurora.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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®