From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/2] spinlock: fair read-write locks
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:57:43 +0000
Message-ID: <56B1EB37.90407@citrix.com>
References: <1454326273-23588-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<1454326273-23588-3-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<56B1F28902000078000CDF09@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=834f420c3=david.vrabel@citrix.com>)
	id 1aQw4B-0004bb-G9
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:57:47 +0000
In-Reply-To: <56B1F28902000078000CDF09@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Jennifer Herbert <jennifer.herbert@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 03/02/16 11:28, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 01.02.16 at 12:31, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote:
>> +void queue_write_lock_slowpath(rwlock_t *lock)
>> +{
>> +    u32 cnts;
>> +
>> +    /* Put the writer into the wait queue. */
>> +    spin_lock(&lock->lock);
>> +
>> +    /* Try to acquire the lock directly if no reader is present. */
>> +    if ( !atomic_read(&lock->cnts) &&
>> +         (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->cnts, 0, _QW_LOCKED) == 0) )
>> +        goto unlock;
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * Set the waiting flag to notify readers that a writer is pending,
>> +     * or wait for a previous writer to go away.
>> +     */
>> +    for (;;)
> 
> Since everything else here has been nicely converted to Xen style,
> strictly speaking these should be
> 
>     for ( ; ; )
> 
> but of course this is no reason to block the patch. Since however,
> as said in reply to patch 1, ...

TBH, I really think you're pointlessly nit-picking here.  This change
would make zero impact on readability.

>> --- a/xen/include/xen/rwlock.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/rwlock.h
>> @@ -3,6 +3,188 @@
>>  
>>  #include <xen/spinlock.h>
> 
> ... this should go away if possible, it would be nice for the cosmetic
> thing above to also be fixed up at once.

The rwlock structure now includes a spinlock, so this #include is
required here.

David