On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 7:52 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 4:54 AM <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > /* > > - * You need to implement asm/spinlock.h for SMP support. The generic > > - * version does not handle SMP. > > + * Using ticket-spinlock.h as generic for SMP support. > > */ > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > > -#error need an architecture specific asm/spinlock.h > > +#include <asm-generic/ticket-lock.h> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_QUEUED_RWLOCKS > > +#include <asm-generic/qrwlock.h> > > +#else > > +#error Please select ARCH_USE_QUEUED_RWLOCKS in architecture Kconfig > > +#endif > > #endif > > There is no need for the !CONFIG_SMP case, as asm/spinlock.h only ever > gets included for SMP builds in the first place. This was already a mistake > in the existing code, but your change would be the time to fix it. > > I would also drop the !CONFIG_QUEUED_RWLOCKS case, just include > it unconditionally. If any architecture wants the ticket spinlock in > combination with a custom rwlock, they can simply include the > asm-generic/ticket-lock.h from their asm/spinlock.h, but more > likely any architecture that can use the ticket spinlock will also > want the qrwlock anyway. I agree, !CONFIG_SMP & !CONFIG_QUEUED_RWLOCKS are unnecessary. @Palmer, you could pick back the series, thx. > > Arnd -- Best Regards Guo Ren ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/
