linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, fenghua.yu@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
	vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com, gavin.hindman@intel.com,
	jithu.joseph@intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com,
	hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 34/38] x86/intel_rdt: Create debugfs files for pseudo-locking testing
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 19:27:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180523172725.GA15511@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cf40175b-9068-650b-d1af-62762da8ad75@intel.com>

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:19:41AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 5/23/2018 1:05 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 02:02:37PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >> On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >>>> +	ret = strtobool(buf, &bv);
> >>>> +	if (ret == 0 && bv) {
> >>>> +		ret = debugfs_file_get(file->f_path.dentry);
> >>>> +		if (unlikely(ret))
> >>>> +			return ret;
> >>>
> >>> Only ever use unlikely/likely if you can measure the performance
> >>> difference.  Hint, you can't do that here, it's not needed at all.
> >>
> >> Here my intention was to follow the current best practices and in the
> >> kernel source I am working with eight of the ten usages of
> >> debugfs_file_get() is followed by an unlikely(). My assumption was thus
> >> that this is a best practice. Thanks for catching this - I'll change it.
> > 
> > Really?  That's some horrible examples, any pointers to them?  I think I
> > need to do a massive sweep of the kernel tree and fix up all of this
> > crud so that people don't keep cut/paste the same bad code everywhere.
> 
> As you know debugfs_file_get() is a recent addition to the kernel,
> introduced in:
> commit e9117a5a4bf65d8e99f060d356a04d27a60b436d
> Author: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
> Date:   Tue Oct 31 00:15:48 2017 +0100
> 
>     debugfs: implement per-file removal protection
> 
> Following this introduction, the same author modified the now obsolete
> calls of debugfs_use_file_start() to debugfs_file_get() in commits:
> 
> commit 7cda7b8f97da9382bb945d541a85cde58d5dac27
> Author: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
> Date:   Tue Oct 31 00:15:51 2017 +0100
> 
>     IB/hfi1: convert to debugfs_file_get() and -put()
> 
> 
> commit 69d29f9e6a53559895e6f785f6cf72daa738f132
> Author: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
> Date:   Tue Oct 31 00:15:50 2017 +0100
> 
>     debugfs: convert to debugfs_file_get() and -put()
> 
> 
> In the above two commits the usage of the new debugfs_file_get()
> primarily follows the pattern of:
> r = debugfs_file_get(d);
> if (unlikely(r))
> 
> Since the author of the new interface used the pattern above in the
> conversions I do not think it is unreasonable to find other developers
> following suit believing that it is a best practice.

Ah, that's where that pattern came from, thanks for finding it.  It was
a conversion of the "old" api in the IB code that was using likely(),
which in a way, did make sense to use (due to the way processors assume
0 is "true")

I'll work on cleaning all of these up on my next long plane ride, should
give me something to do :)

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-23 17:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-22 11:28 [PATCH V4 00/38] Intel(R) Resource Director Technology Cache Pseudo-Locking enabling Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 01/38] x86/intel_rdt: Document new mode, size, and bit_usage Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 02/38] x86/intel_rdt: Introduce RDT resource group mode Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 03/38] x86/intel_rdt: Associate mode with each RDT resource group Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 04/38] x86/intel_rdt: Introduce resource group's mode resctrl file Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 05/38] x86/intel_rdt: Introduce test to determine if closid is in use Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 06/38] x86/intel_rdt: Make useful functions available internally Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 07/38] x86/intel_rdt: Initialize new resource group with sane defaults Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 08/38] x86/intel_rdt: Introduce new "exclusive" mode Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 09/38] x86/intel_rdt: Enable setting of exclusive mode Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 10/38] x86/intel_rdt: Making CBM name and type more explicit Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:28 ` [PATCH V4 11/38] x86/intel_rdt: Support flexible data to parsing callbacks Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 12/38] x86/intel_rdt: Ensure requested schemata respects mode Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 13/38] x86/intel_rdt: Introduce "bit_usage" to display cache allocations details Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 21:03   ` Randy Dunlap
2018-05-22 21:09     ` Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 14/38] x86/intel_rdt: Display resource groups' allocations' size in bytes Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 15/38] x86/intel_rdt: Documentation for Cache Pseudo-Locking Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 16/38] x86/intel_rdt: Introduce the Cache Pseudo-Locking modes Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 17/38] x86/intel_rdt: Respect read and write access Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 18/38] x86/intel_rdt: Add utility to test if tasks assigned to resource group Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 19/38] x86/intel_rdt: Add utility to restrict/restore access to resctrl files Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 20/38] x86/intel_rdt: Protect against resource group changes during locking Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 21/38] x86/intel_rdt: Utilities to restrict/restore access to specific files Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 22/38] x86/intel_rdt: Add check to determine if monitoring in progress Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 23/38] x86/intel_rdt: Introduce pseudo-locked region Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 24/38] x86/intel_rdt: Support enter/exit of locksetup mode Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 25/38] x86/intel_rdt: Enable entering of pseudo-locksetup mode Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 26/38] x86/intel_rdt: Split resource group removal in two Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 27/38] x86/intel_rdt: Add utilities to test pseudo-locked region possibility Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 28/38] x86/intel_rdt: Discover supported platforms via prefetch disable bits Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 29/38] x86/intel_rdt: Pseudo-lock region creation/removal core Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 30/38] x86/intel_rdt: Support creation/removal of pseudo-locked region Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 31/38] x86/intel_rdt: resctrl files reflect pseudo-locked information Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 32/38] x86/intel_rdt: Ensure RDT cleanup on exit Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 33/38] x86/intel_rdt: Create resctrl debug area Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 34/38] x86/intel_rdt: Create debugfs files for pseudo-locking testing Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 19:43   ` Greg KH
2018-05-22 21:02     ` Reinette Chatre
2018-05-23  8:05       ` Greg KH
2018-05-23 17:19         ` Reinette Chatre
2018-05-23 17:27           ` Greg KH [this message]
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 35/38] x86/intel_rdt: Create character device exposing pseudo-locked region Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 36/38] x86/intel_rdt: More precise L2 hit/miss measurements Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 37/38] x86/intel_rdt: Support L3 cache performance event of Broadwell Reinette Chatre
2018-05-22 11:29 ` [PATCH V4 38/38] x86/intel_rdt: Limit C-states dynamically when pseudo-locking active Reinette Chatre

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180523172725.GA15511@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=gavin.hindman@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jithu.joseph@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).