lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
SubjectRE: [tipc-discussion] [PATCH net/tipc] Replace rcu_swap_protected() with rcu_replace_pointer()
Date
Hi Ying, Paul,

Please see my comments inline. Thanks!

BR/Tuong

-----Original Message-----
From: Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 8:32 AM
To: paulmck@kernel.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; mingo@kernel.org;
tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net; kernel-team@fb.com;
torvalds@linux-foundation.org; davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [tipc-discussion] [PATCH net/tipc] Replace rcu_swap_protected()
with rcu_replace_pointer()

On 12/11/19 6:38 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> commit 4ee8e2c68b076867b7a5af82a38010fffcab611c
> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> Date: Mon Dec 9 19:13:45 2019 -0800
>
> net/tipc: Replace rcu_swap_protected() with rcu_replace_pointer()
>
> This commit replaces the use of rcu_swap_protected() with the more
> intuitively appealing rcu_replace_pointer() as a step towards removing
> rcu_swap_protected().
>
> Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wiAsJLw1egFEE=Z7-GGtM6wcvtyytXZA1+BHqta4g
g6Hw@mail.gmail.com/
> Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> Cc: Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@ericsson.com>
> Cc: Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>
> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
> Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
> Cc: <tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
>

Acked-by: Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>

> diff --git a/net/tipc/crypto.c b/net/tipc/crypto.c
> index 990a872..978d2db 100644
> --- a/net/tipc/crypto.c
> +++ b/net/tipc/crypto.c
> @@ -257,9 +257,6 @@ static char *tipc_key_change_dump(struct tipc_key old,
struct tipc_key new,
> #define tipc_aead_rcu_ptr(rcu_ptr, lock) \
> rcu_dereference_protected((rcu_ptr), lockdep_is_held(lock))
>
> -#define tipc_aead_rcu_swap(rcu_ptr, ptr, lock)
\
> - rcu_swap_protected((rcu_ptr), (ptr), lockdep_is_held(lock))
> -
> #define tipc_aead_rcu_replace(rcu_ptr, ptr, lock) \
> do { \
> typeof(rcu_ptr) __tmp = rcu_dereference_protected((rcu_ptr), \
> @@ -1189,7 +1186,7 @@ static bool tipc_crypto_key_try_align(struct
tipc_crypto *rx, u8 new_pending)
>
> /* Move passive key if any */
> if (key.passive) {
> - tipc_aead_rcu_swap(rx->aead[key.passive], tmp2, &rx->lock);
> + tmp2 = rcu_replace_pointer(rx->aead[key.passive], tmp2,
&rx->lock);
The 3rd parameter should be the lockdep condition checking instead of the
spinlock's pointer i.e. "lockdep_is_held(&rx->lock)"?
That's why I'd prefer to use the 'tipc_aead_rcu_swap ()' macro, which is
clear & concise at least for the context here. It might be re-used later as
well...

> x = (key.passive - key.pending + new_pending) % KEY_MAX;
> new_passive = (x <= 0) ? x + KEY_MAX : x;
> }
>


_______________________________________________
tipc-discussion mailing list
tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tipc-discussion

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-11 03:11    [W:0.271 / U:0.284 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site