On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 04:41:24PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 13:29:11 -0800
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > All well and good, but the stall-warning code is nowhere near a fastpath.
> >
> > Is try_cmpxchg() considered more readable in this context?
>
>
> - cmpxchg(&rcu_state.jiffies_stall, js, jn) == js) {
> + try_cmpxchg(&rcu_state.jiffies_stall, &js, jn)) {
>
> It's basically the same :-/
That was my assessment. ;-)
> But looking at this use case, I'd actually NAK it, as it is misleading.
>
> As try_cmpxchg() is used to get rid of the updating of the old value. As in
> the ring buffer code we had:
>
> void ring_buffer_record_off(struct trace_buffer *buffer)
> {
> unsigned int rd;
> unsigned int new_rd;
>
> do {
> rd = atomic_read(&buffer->record_disabled);
> new_rd = rd | RB_BUFFER_OFF;
> } while (!atomic_cmpxchg(&buffer->record_disabled, &rd, new_rd) != rd);
> }
>
> and the try_cmpxchg() converted it to:
>
> void ring_buffer_record_off(struct trace_buffer *buffer)
> {
> unsigned int rd;
> unsigned int new_rd;
>
> rd = atomic_read(&buffer->record_disabled);
> do {
> new_rd = rd | RB_BUFFER_OFF;
> } while (!atomic_try_cmpxchg(&buffer->record_disabled, &rd, new_rd));
> }
>
> Which got rid of the need to constantly update the rd variable (cmpxchg
> will load rax with the value read, so it removes the need for an extra
> move).
>
> But in your case, we don't need to update js, in which case the
> try_cmpxchg() does.
>
> The patch that Uros sent me for the ring buffer code also does some of
> that, which I feel is wrong.
>
> So with that, I would nack the patch.
OK, I will leave this one out.
Thanx, Paul
