Re: [PATCH 1/5] locking: Add rwsem_is_write_locked()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 9/7/23 17:06, Waiman Long wrote:

On 9/7/23 15:33, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 02:05:54PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
On 9/7/23 13:47, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
+static inline int rwsem_is_write_locked(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
+{
+    return atomic_long_read(&sem->count) & 1 /* RWSEM_WRITER_LOCKED */;
+}
I would prefer you move the various RWSEM_* count bit macros from
kernel/locking/rwsem.c to under the !PREEMPT_RT block and directly use
RWSEM_WRITER_LOCKED instead of hardcoding a value of 1.
Just to be clear, you want the ~50 lines from:

/*
  * On 64-bit architectures, the bit definitions of the count are:
...
#define RWSEM_READ_FAILED_MASK (RWSEM_WRITER_MASK|RWSEM_FLAG_WAITERS|\
RWSEM_FLAG_HANDOFF|RWSEM_FLAG_READFAIL)

moved from rwsem.c to rwsem.h?

Or just these four lines:

#define RWSEM_WRITER_LOCKED     (1UL << 0)
#define RWSEM_FLAG_WAITERS      (1UL << 1)
#define RWSEM_FLAG_HANDOFF      (1UL << 2)
#define RWSEM_FLAG_READFAIL     (1UL << (BITS_PER_LONG - 1))

I think just the first 3 lines will be enough. Maybe a bit of comment about these bit flags in the count atomic_long value.

Actually, the old rwsem implementation won't allow you to reliably determine if a rwsem is write locked because the xadd instruction is used for write locking and the code had to back out the WRITER_BIAS if the attempt failed. Maybe that is why XFS has its own code to check if a rwsem is write locked which is needed with the old rwsem implementation.

The new implementation makes this check reliable. Still it is not easy to check if a rwsem is read locked as the check will be rather complicated and probably racy.

Cheers,
Longman





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux