On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 04:41:19PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 12:38:14AM +0100, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
...
> Not quite what we're talking about. Instead consider this:
>
> The normal flow would be something like:
>
> extern void spin_lock(spinlock_t *lock) __acquires(lock);
> extern void spin_unlock(spinlock_t *lock) __releases(lock);
>
> extern bool _spin_trylock(spinlock_t *lock) __acquires(lock);
>
> #define __cond_lock(x, c) ((c) ? ({ __acquire(x); 1; }) : 0)
> #define spin_trylock(lock) __cond_lock(lock, _spin_lock)
>
>
> if (spin_trylock(lock)) {
>
> /* do crap */
>
> spin_unlock();
> }
>
>
> So the proposal here:
>
> https://markmail.org/message/4obybcgqscznnx63
>
> would have us write:
>
> extern bool spin_trylock(spinlock_t *lock) __attribute__((context(lock, 0, spin_trylock(lock));
Well, allowing arbitrary conditions would be hard/impossible but you're
only asking to have the *return value* as condition, right? That looks
as reasonably feasible.
> Basically have sparse do a transform on its own expression tree and
> inject the very same crud we now do manually. This avoids cluttering the
> kernel tree with this nonsense.
So, a call of a function declared with __acquires() or releases() is
interpreted by Sparse as if the call is immediately followed by an
increase or a decrease of the context. It wouldn't be very hard to
add a new attribute (something like __cond_context) and let Sparse do
as if a call to a function with such attribute is directly followed
by a test of its return value and a corresponding change in the context.
It would boil down to:
extern bool spin_trylock(lock) __cond_context(lock);
if (spin_trylock(lock)) {
/* do crap */
spin_unlock();
}
behaving like the following code currently would:
extern bool spin_trylock(lock);
if (spin_trylock(lock)) {
__acquire(lock);
/* do crap */
spin_unlock();
}
Would something like this be satisfactory?
-- Luc
