[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v3 04/13] xen/spinlock: introduce new type for recursive spinlocks
- To: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.vallejo@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 14:36:48 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=OY86zBBA9t4ojkkGr4da68pOgg67kFaqr6QjZ1cRupw=; b=G4k6gDBosZfXgl6q2RgMAMiwTElFIco3qyNx44lndfNVcZcTu9Vy3VmntBF67skMeZnNwWQHRPnIn/32v4lAJz4CYL2t6yMNp03GUQA1F/S7zuqFS51V+ug2+fyL+ZXmSF5AkdkuM7jUgZ8XdqudFRmfT/qRe0sTx5oF1qY9/T60JtxHn58LTqAl9H6nThToKV2tkyda9jaQBeFcUvld6JIOZW+tKeOg4SP0JV7P48kPn6dOtlrKVZy0bkcnM1jpt3BVxfHnRuApGSyh+nAn2nieXrLtya6fB/IT+hg5jKqYsvowWf5fnva/9XnIy/1W35BCw8AxxyqEsRna+FPgUw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=LubRkwu9Ril8fhnhhH3q0m4lQb9lVJOCytZ8wrz04LUVA6xdo2sjqskzRK5h+5sbe8Mt6uSX2+aduVD746x/U3bZdOxTh8cUlKVhwDXzTGSNcAKOQoc4vySavP6Pk5xNsOliQuzbx34fTDLQzZz5bLGGGBwbmrXvE3KXcJz53lx+jheHqy5G3+lq/VjtGHEvrhipRhGQAlMzH6Fe/f3DfAIPQ05ynHdlbK9vYwwaN8+bA/Jp6sCGdF5GUZ5iKZs/JmID1Lm8GE4GcpSrdQqIgfrsWOarxAeYgoA5EkZq3HUrhw1g18WD+5HojRzb4wrsud1HrkspEpIrb1zGa3peNQ==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: javi.merino@xxxxxxxxx, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Durrant <paul@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 13:37:26 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 28.11.2023 14:16, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 24.11.23 19:59, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
>> On 20/11/2023 11:38, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h
>> > [snip]
>>> @@ -182,8 +191,10 @@ typedef struct spinlock {
>>> #endif
>>> } spinlock_t;
>>> +typedef spinlock_t rspinlock_t;
>>> #define spin_lock_init(l) (*(l) = (spinlock_t)SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED)
>>> +#define rspin_lock_init(l) (*(l) = (rspinlock_t)SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED)
>>
>> nit: Both variants of [r]spin_lock_init(l) could be inline functions
>> rather than macros.
>
> I was following the spin_lock_init() example, and I guess that is following
> the Linux kernel example.
>
> I don't mind either way, but maybe other maintainers have a preference?
While switching to inline functions would be nice, the new item should
imo be in line with the existing one (i.e. be a macro as long as that
other one also is a macro). And converting what has been there shouldn't
be a requirement for this series to land.
Jan
|
