From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754547AbXFNWJc (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:09:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751907AbXFNWJA (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:09:00 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:36416 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751799AbXFNWI7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:08:59 -0400 Message-Id: <20070614220446.659716697@chello.nl> References: <20070614215817.389524447@chello.nl> User-Agent: quilt/0.46-1 Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 23:58:22 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: miklos@szeredi.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, neilb@suse.de, dgc@sgi.com, tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, nikita@clusterfs.com, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, yingchao.zhou@gmail.com, andrea@suse.de Subject: [PATCH 05/17] lib: percpu_count_sum_signed() Content-Disposition: inline; filename=percpu_counter_sum.patch X-Bad-Reply: References but no 'Re:' in Subject. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read. Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum() with percpu_counter_sum_positive(), and call this new primitive percpu_counter_sum() instead? Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra --- include/linux/percpu_counter.h | 18 +++++++++++++++++- lib/percpu_counter.c | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/percpu_counter.h =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/percpu_counter.h 2007-05-23 20:37:54.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/percpu_counter.h 2007-05-23 20:38:09.000000000 +0200 @@ -35,7 +35,18 @@ void percpu_counter_destroy(struct percp void percpu_counter_set(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount); void __percpu_counter_mod(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s32 amount, s32 batch); void __percpu_counter_mod64(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount, s32 batch); -s64 percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc); +s64 __percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc); + +static inline s64 percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc) +{ + s64 ret = __percpu_counter_sum(fbc); + return ret < 0 ? 0 : ret; +} + +static inline s64 percpu_counter_sum_signed(struct percpu_counter *fbc) +{ + return __percpu_counter_sum(fbc); +} static inline void percpu_counter_mod(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s32 amount) { @@ -124,6 +135,11 @@ static inline s64 percpu_counter_sum(str return percpu_counter_read_positive(fbc); } +static inline s64 percpu_counter_sum_signed(struct percpu_counter *fbc) +{ + return fbc->count; +} + #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ static inline void percpu_counter_inc(struct percpu_counter *fbc) Index: linux-2.6/lib/percpu_counter.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/lib/percpu_counter.c 2007-05-23 20:38:03.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6/lib/percpu_counter.c 2007-05-23 20:38:18.000000000 +0200 @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__percpu_counter_mod64); * Add up all the per-cpu counts, return the result. This is a more accurate * but much slower version of percpu_counter_read_positive() */ -s64 percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc) +s64 __percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc) { s64 ret; int cpu; @@ -83,9 +83,9 @@ s64 percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_cou ret += *pcount; } spin_unlock(&fbc->lock); - return ret < 0 ? 0 : ret; + return ret; } -EXPORT_SYMBOL(percpu_counter_sum); +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__percpu_counter_sum); void percpu_counter_init(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount) { --