Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] locking/mutex: Use mutex flags macro instead of hard code value | From | Mukesh Ojha <> | Date | Tue, 30 Jul 2019 18:10:49 +0530 |
| |
On 7/30/2019 1:33 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 01:23:13PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote: >> On 7/29/2019 4:37 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 04:22:58PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote: >>>> Let's use the mutex flag macro(which got moved from mutex.c >>>> to linux/mutex.h in the last patch) instead of hard code >>>> value which was used in __mutex_owner(). >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org> >>>> --- >>>> include/linux/mutex.h | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mutex.h b/include/linux/mutex.h >>>> index 79b28be..c3833ba 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/mutex.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/mutex.h >>>> @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ struct mutex { >>>> */ >>>> static inline struct task_struct *__mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock) >>>> { >>>> - return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~0x07); >>>> + return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~MUTEX_FLAGS); >>>> } >>> I would _much_ rather move __mutex_owner() out of line, you're exposing >>> far too much stuff. >> if i understand you correctly, you want me to move __mutex_owner() to >> mutex.c >> __mutex_owner() is used in mutex_is_locked() and mutex_trylock_recursive >> inside linux/mutex.h. >> >> Shall i move them as well ? > Yes, then you can make __mutex_owner() static.
To make it static , i have to export mutex_is_locked() after moving it inside mutex.c, so that other module can use it.
Also are we thinking of removing static inline /* __deprecated */ __must_check enum mutex_trylock_recursive_enum mutex_trylock_recursive(struct mutex *lock)
inside linux/mutex.h in future ?
As i see it is used at one or two places and there is a check inside checkpatch guarding its further use .
Thanks, Mukesh
> > Thanks!
| |