From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1161222AbcBQLA5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 17 Feb 2016 06:00:57 -0500
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:47898 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S934013AbcBQLAz (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 17 Feb 2016 06:00:55 -0500
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:00:40 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
        Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>,
        Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] lib/percpu-list: Per-cpu list with associated
 per-cpu locks
Message-ID: <20160217110040.GB6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1455672680-7153-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
 <1455672680-7153-2-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
 <20160217095318.GO14668@dastard>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160217095318.GO14668@dastard>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 08:53:18PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * for_all_percpu_list_entries - iterate over all the per-cpu list with locking
> > + * @pos:	the type * to use as a loop cursor for the current .
> > + * @next:	an internal type * variable pointing to the next entry
> > + * @pchead:	an internal struct list * of percpu list head
> > + * @pclock:	an internal variable for the current per-cpu spinlock
> > + * @head:	the head of the per-cpu list
> > + * @member:	the name of the per-cpu list within the struct
> > + */
> > +#define for_all_percpu_list_entries(pos, next, pchead, pclock, head, member)\
> > +	{								 \
> > +	int cpu;							 \
> > +	for_each_possible_cpu (cpu) {					 \
> > +		typeof(*pos) *next;					 \
> > +		spinlock_t *pclock = per_cpu_ptr(&(head)->lock, cpu);	 \
> > +		struct list_head *pchead = &per_cpu_ptr(head, cpu)->list;\
> > +		spin_lock(pclock);					 \
> > +		list_for_each_entry_safe(pos, next, pchead, member.list)
> > +
> > +#define end_all_percpu_list_entries(pclock)	spin_unlock(pclock); } }
> 
> This is a bit of a landmine 

Yeah, that is pretty terrible. Maybe a visitor interface is advisable?

visit_percpu_list_entries(struct percpu_list *head, void (*visitor)(struct list_head *pos, void *data), void *data)
{
	int cpu;

	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
		spinlock_t *lock = per_cpu_ptr(&head->lock, cpu);
		struct list_head *head = per_cpu_ptr(&head->list, cpu);
		struct list_head *pos, *tmp;

		spin_lock(lock);
		for (pos = head->next, tmp = pos->next; pos != head; pos = tmp)
			visitor(pos, data);
		spin_unlock(lock);
	}
}