mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] locking/qspinlock: Always evaluate lockevent* non-event parameter once
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:50:04 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240319005004.1692705-1-longman@redhat.com> (raw)

The inc parameter of lockevent_add() and the cond parameter of
lockevent_cond_inc() are only evaluated when CONFIG_LOCK_EVENT_COUNTS
is on. That can cause problem if those parameters are expressions
with side effect like a "++". Fix this by evaluating those non-event
parameters once even if CONFIG_LOCK_EVENT_COUNTS is off. This will also
eliminate the need of the __maybe_unused attribute to the wait_early
local variable in pv_wait_node().

Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lock_events.h        | 4 ++--
 kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lock_events.h b/kernel/locking/lock_events.h
index a6016b91803d..d2345e9c0190 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lock_events.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/lock_events.h
@@ -53,8 +53,8 @@ static inline void __lockevent_add(enum lock_events event, int inc)
 #else  /* CONFIG_LOCK_EVENT_COUNTS */
 
 #define lockevent_inc(ev)
-#define lockevent_add(ev, c)
-#define lockevent_cond_inc(ev, c)
+#define lockevent_add(ev, c)		do { (void)(c); } while (0)
+#define lockevent_cond_inc(ev, c)	do { (void)(c); } while (0)
 
 #endif /* CONFIG_LOCK_EVENT_COUNTS */
 
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
index ae2b12f68b90..169950fe1aad 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
@@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static void pv_wait_node(struct mcs_spinlock *node, struct mcs_spinlock *prev)
 {
 	struct pv_node *pn = (struct pv_node *)node;
 	struct pv_node *pp = (struct pv_node *)prev;
-	bool __maybe_unused wait_early;
+	bool wait_early;
 	int loop;
 
 	for (;;) {
-- 
2.39.3


             reply	other threads:[~2024-03-19  0:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-19  0:50 Waiman Long [this message]
2024-03-19  4:41 ` Boqun Feng
2024-03-21 19:52 ` [tip: locking/core] " tip-bot2 for Waiman Long

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=20240319005004.1692705-1-longman@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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®