On 10/09/2017 12:03 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Mon, 09 Oct 2017, Waiman Long wrote: > >> On 10/09/2017 09:08 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: >>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2017, Waiman Long wrote: >>> >>>> This patch provides an alternative way of list selection. The caller >>>> can provide a object context which will be hashed to one of the list >>>> in a dlock-list. The object can then be added into that particular >>>> list. Lookup can be done by iterating elements in the provided list >>>> only instead of all the lists in a dlock-list. >>> >>> Unless I'm misusing the api, I could not find a standard way of >>> iterating a _particular_ list head (the one the dlock_list_hash() >>> returned). This is because iterators always want the all the heads. >>> >>> Also, in my particular epoll case I'd need the head->lock _not_ to >>> be dropped after the iteration, and therefore is pretty adhoc. >>> Currently we do: >>> >>> dlist_for_each_entry() { >>> // acquire head->lock for each list >>> } >>> // no locks held >>> dlist_add() >>> >>> I'm thinking perhaps we could have dlist_check_add() which passes a >>> callback to ensure we want to add the node. The function could acquire >>> the head->lock and not release it until the very end. >> >> With the dlock_list_hash(), dlock-list is degenerated into a pool of >> list where one is chosen by hashing. So the regular list iteration >> macros like list_for_each_entry() can then be used. Of course, you have >> to explicitly do the lock and unlock operation. > > Right, which seemed rather asymmetric and fragile, albeit adhoc to epoll. > Particularly not having the iter structure, makes use directly have to > deal with the spinlock, and there goes irq awareness out the window. > Right. We don't need the irq safety support in this case. >> I could also encapsulate it a bit with inlined function like > > Probably not worth it, unless some other use cases came up. This just > bulks the api even more. I am thinking of adding only one more init API. So it is not a significant bulking-up at all. Cheers, Longman