From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S965234AbcIHI7S (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 8 Sep 2016 04:59:18 -0400
Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:42905 "EHLO
        Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S965119AbcIHI7P (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 8 Sep 2016 04:59:15 -0400
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 10:56:36 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
        Sai Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/33] x86/intel_rdt: Add Class of service
 management
In-Reply-To: <1473328647-33116-9-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1609081037020.5647@nanos>
References: <1473328647-33116-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1473328647-33116-9-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 8 Sep 2016, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> +#ifndef _RDT_H_
> +#define _RDT_H_

The standard guard is

    _ASM_X86_RDT_H

> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_RDT

What's the purpose of sticking a struct definition inside an ifdef?

> +
> +struct clos_cbm_table {
> +	unsigned long cbm;
> +	unsigned int clos_refcnt;

Please proper align the struct members for readability sake

	unsigned long	cbm;
	unsigned int	clos_refcnt;

Adding a kerneldoc comment above the struct explaining it would not hurting
either.

> +/*
> + * cctable maintains 1:1 mapping between CLOSid and cache bitmask.
> + */
> +static struct clos_cbm_table *cctable;
> +/*
> + * closid availability bit map.
> + */
> +unsigned long *closmap;
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(rdtgroup_mutex);
> +
> +static inline void closid_get(u32 closid)
> +{
> +	struct clos_cbm_table *cct = &cctable[closid];
> +
> +	lockdep_assert_held(&rdtgroup_mutex);
> +
> +	cct->clos_refcnt++;

So the whole thing can be written with a single line at the single call
site.

	cc_table[closid].clos_refcnt++;

And that already has the lockdep_assert_held() check. While companies might
pay based on line counts, kernel development asks for readable and sensible
code.

> +}
> +
> +static int closid_alloc(u32 *closid)
> +{
> +	u32 maxid;
> +	u32 id;

Please put variables with the same type into one line. There is no value in
wasting screen estate.

> +
> +	lockdep_assert_held(&rdtgroup_mutex);
> +
> +	maxid = boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_max_closid;
> +	id = find_first_zero_bit(closmap, maxid);
> +	if (id == maxid)
> +		return -ENOSPC;
> +
> +	set_bit(id, closmap);
> +	closid_get(id);
> +	*closid = id;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void closid_free(u32 closid)
> +{
> +	clear_bit(closid, closmap);
> +	cctable[closid].cbm = 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void closid_put(u32 closid)
> +{
> +	struct clos_cbm_table *cct = &cctable[closid];
> +
> +	lockdep_assert_held(&rdtgroup_mutex);
> +	if (WARN_ON(!cct->clos_refcnt))
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!--cct->clos_refcnt)
> +		closid_free(closid);
> +}
>  
>  static int __init intel_rdt_late_init(void)
>  {
>  	struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &boot_cpu_data;
> +	u32 maxid;
> +	int err = 0, size;
>  
>  	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CAT_L3))
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
> -	pr_info("Intel cache allocation detected\n");
> +	maxid = c->x86_cache_max_closid;
>  
> -	return 0;
> +	size = maxid * sizeof(struct clos_cbm_table);
> +	cctable = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!cctable) {
> +		err = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_err;

I told you that before: Using a goto just to return err is pointless and
silly. What the hell is wrong with 

		return -ENOMEM;
???

> +	}
> +
> +	size = BITS_TO_LONGS(maxid) * sizeof(long);
> +	closmap = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!closmap) {
> +		kfree(cctable);
> +		err = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_err;

Groan.

> +	}
> +
> +	pr_info("Intel cache allocation enabled\n");
> +out_err: