On 08/05/2012 06:31 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: >> FYI, Mathieu is the author of this file. >> >> -- Steve >> >> >> On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 16:23 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: >>> Switch tracepoints to use the new hashtable implementation. This reduces the amount of >>> generic unrelated code in the tracepoints. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@xxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> kernel/tracepoint.c | 26 +++++++++----------------- >>> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/kernel/tracepoint.c b/kernel/tracepoint.c >>> index d96ba22..b5a2650 100644 >>> --- a/kernel/tracepoint.c >>> +++ b/kernel/tracepoint.c >>> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ >>> #include <linux/slab.h> >>> #include <linux/sched.h> >>> #include <linux/static_key.h> >>> +#include <linux/hashtable.h> >>> >>> extern struct tracepoint * const __start___tracepoints_ptrs[]; >>> extern struct tracepoint * const __stop___tracepoints_ptrs[]; >>> @@ -49,8 +50,7 @@ static LIST_HEAD(tracepoint_module_list); >>> * Protected by tracepoints_mutex. >>> */ >>> #define TRACEPOINT_HASH_BITS 6 >>> -#define TRACEPOINT_TABLE_SIZE (1 << TRACEPOINT_HASH_BITS) >>> -static struct hlist_head tracepoint_table[TRACEPOINT_TABLE_SIZE]; >>> +DEFINE_STATIC_HASHTABLE(tracepoint_table, TRACEPOINT_HASH_BITS); > > I wonder why the "static" has been embedded within > "DEFINE_STATIC_HASHTABLE" ? I'm used to see something similar to: > > static DEFINE_HASHTABLE(tracepoint_table, TRACEPOINT_HASH_BITS); > > elsewhere in the kernel (e.g. static DEFINE_PER_CPU(), static > DEFINE_MUTEX(), etc). We had to create two different definitions of hashtable, one to be used as static and one to be used in structs. I chose the uglier way of doing it, and Tejun already pointed it out :) It will be much nicer in the future. >>> >>> /* >>> * Note about RCU : >>> @@ -191,16 +191,14 @@ tracepoint_entry_remove_probe(struct tracepoint_entry *entry, >>> */ >>> static struct tracepoint_entry *get_tracepoint(const char *name) >>> { >>> - struct hlist_head *head; >>> struct hlist_node *node; >>> struct tracepoint_entry *e; >>> u32 hash = jhash(name, strlen(name), 0); >>> >>> - head = &tracepoint_table[hash & (TRACEPOINT_TABLE_SIZE - 1)]; >>> - hlist_for_each_entry(e, node, head, hlist) { >>> + hash_for_each_possible(&tracepoint_table, node, e, hlist, hash) >>> if (!strcmp(name, e->name)) >>> return e; >>> - } >>> + > > Typically, where there are 2 or more nesting levels, I try to keep the > outer brackets, even if the 1st level only contain a single statement > (this is what I did across tracepoint.c). This is especially useful when > nesting multiple if levels, and ensures the "else" clause match the > right if. We might want to keep it that way within the file, to ensure > style consistency. Roger that, will fix. > Other than that, it looks good! > > Thanks! > > Mathieu > Thanks for the review Mathieu! -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx"> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>