On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 12:03:16AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 09:42:34AM +0800, Changbin Du wrote: > > At some places we need to determine whether we're in nmi, hardirq or > > softirq context. This adds a macro in_serving_irq() as a shortcut for > > that. > > > > Meanwhile, apply this new macro to existing code in rcutiny and vsprintf. > > > > Signed-off-by: Changbin Du <changbin.du@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > include/linux/preempt.h | 4 +++- > > include/linux/rcutiny.h | 3 +-- > > lib/vsprintf.c | 2 +- > > 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/preempt.h b/include/linux/preempt.h > > index 9881eac0698f..9a1c924e2c6c 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/preempt.h > > +++ b/include/linux/preempt.h > > @@ -92,12 +92,14 @@ > > * in_nmi() - We're in NMI context > > * in_hardirq() - We're in hard IRQ context > > * in_serving_softirq() - We're in softirq context > > + * in_serving_irq() - We're in nmi, hardirq or softirq context > > * in_task() - We're in task context > > */ > > #define in_nmi() (nmi_count()) > > #define in_hardirq() (hardirq_count()) > > #define in_serving_softirq() (softirq_count() & SOFTIRQ_OFFSET) > > -#define in_task() (!(in_nmi() | in_hardirq() | in_serving_softirq())) > > +#define in_serving_irq() (in_nmi() | in_hardirq() | in_serving_softirq()) > > +#define in_task() (!in_serving_irq()) > > > > So in_serving_irq() is !in_task(), right? If so, why not... > Adding in_serving_irq() is to reflect the real purpose so improve readability. And can we preserve that !in_task() means in serving irq context in future? I don't know. -- Cheers, Changbin Du
