netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq()
@ 2014-10-21 14:16 Sowmini Varadhan
  2014-10-21 22:35 ` Julian Calaby
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sowmini Varadhan @ 2014-10-21 14:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: davem, sowmini.varadhan; +Cc: netdev, sparclinux

For NAPIfied drivers , there is no need to
synchronize by doing irqsave/restore on vio.lock in the I/O
path.

Signed-off-by: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>
---
 arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
index 7ef081a..d731586 100644
--- a/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
+++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
@@ -747,10 +747,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(vio_ldc_free);
 
 void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
 {
-	unsigned long flags;
+	unsigned long flags = 0;
 	int err, state;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&vio->lock, flags);
+	if (!in_softirq())
+		spin_lock_irqsave(&vio->lock, flags);
 
 	state = ldc_state(vio->lp);
 
@@ -777,7 +778,8 @@ void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
 		mod_timer(&vio->timer, expires);
 	}
 
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vio->lock, flags);
+	if (!in_softirq())
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vio->lock, flags);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(vio_port_up);
 
-- 
1.8.4.2


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq()
  2014-10-21 14:16 [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq() Sowmini Varadhan
@ 2014-10-21 22:35 ` Julian Calaby
  2014-10-21 22:39   ` Sowmini Varadhan
  2014-10-21 23:56   ` Dave Kleikamp
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Julian Calaby @ 2014-10-21 22:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sowmini Varadhan; +Cc: David S. Miller, netdev, sparclinux

Hi Sowmini,

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Sowmini Varadhan
<sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com> wrote:
> For NAPIfied drivers , there is no need to
> synchronize by doing irqsave/restore on vio.lock in the I/O
> path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>
> ---
>  arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
> index 7ef081a..d731586 100644
> --- a/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
> +++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
> @@ -747,10 +747,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(vio_ldc_free);
>
>  void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
>  {
> -       unsigned long flags;
> +       unsigned long flags = 0;

Is gcc not smart enough to know that this variable isn't used before
it's set? (I assume it isn't used elsewhere in this function)

>         int err, state;
>
> -       spin_lock_irqsave(&vio->lock, flags);
> +       if (!in_softirq())
> +               spin_lock_irqsave(&vio->lock, flags);
>
>         state = ldc_state(vio->lp);
>
> @@ -777,7 +778,8 @@ void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
>                 mod_timer(&vio->timer, expires);
>         }
>
> -       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vio->lock, flags);
> +       if (!in_softirq())
> +               spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vio->lock, flags);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(vio_port_up);

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq()
  2014-10-21 22:35 ` Julian Calaby
@ 2014-10-21 22:39   ` Sowmini Varadhan
  2014-10-21 22:42     ` Julian Calaby
  2014-10-21 23:56   ` Dave Kleikamp
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sowmini Varadhan @ 2014-10-21 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Julian Calaby; +Cc: David S. Miller, netdev, sparclinux

On (10/22/14 09:35), Julian Calaby wrote:
> >  void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
> >  {
> > -       unsigned long flags;
> > +       unsigned long flags = 0;
> 
> Is gcc not smart enough to know that this variable isn't used before
> it's set? (I assume it isn't used elsewhere in this function)

No, it's not used elsewhere in the function, and yes, I too was
surprised by the build warning, which is why I initialized it
as above.

--Sowmini


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq()
  2014-10-21 22:39   ` Sowmini Varadhan
@ 2014-10-21 22:42     ` Julian Calaby
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Julian Calaby @ 2014-10-21 22:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sowmini Varadhan; +Cc: David S. Miller, netdev, sparclinux

Hi Sowmini,

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Sowmini Varadhan
<sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com> wrote:
> On (10/22/14 09:35), Julian Calaby wrote:
>> >  void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
>> >  {
>> > -       unsigned long flags;
>> > +       unsigned long flags = 0;
>>
>> Is gcc not smart enough to know that this variable isn't used before
>> it's set? (I assume it isn't used elsewhere in this function)
>
> No, it's not used elsewhere in the function, and yes, I too was
> surprised by the build warning, which is why I initialized it
> as above.

Ok, fair enough then.

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq()
  2014-10-21 22:35 ` Julian Calaby
  2014-10-21 22:39   ` Sowmini Varadhan
@ 2014-10-21 23:56   ` Dave Kleikamp
  2014-10-22  0:16     ` Sowmini Varadhan
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dave Kleikamp @ 2014-10-21 23:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Julian Calaby, Sowmini Varadhan; +Cc: David S. Miller, netdev, sparclinux

On 10/21/2014 05:35 PM, Julian Calaby wrote:
> Hi Sowmini,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Sowmini Varadhan
> <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com> wrote:
>> For NAPIfied drivers , there is no need to
>> synchronize by doing irqsave/restore on vio.lock in the I/O
>> path.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c | 8 +++++---
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
>> index 7ef081a..d731586 100644
>> --- a/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
>> +++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/viohs.c
>> @@ -747,10 +747,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(vio_ldc_free);
>>
>>  void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
>>  {
>> -       unsigned long flags;
>> +       unsigned long flags = 0;
> 
> Is gcc not smart enough to know that this variable isn't used before
> it's set? (I assume it isn't used elsewhere in this function)

It probably assumes in_softirq() might evaluate differently in the each
case.

> 
>>         int err, state;
>>
>> -       spin_lock_irqsave(&vio->lock, flags);
>> +       if (!in_softirq())
>> +               spin_lock_irqsave(&vio->lock, flags);
>>
>>         state = ldc_state(vio->lp);
>>
>> @@ -777,7 +778,8 @@ void vio_port_up(struct vio_driver_state *vio)
>>                 mod_timer(&vio->timer, expires);
>>         }
>>
>> -       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vio->lock, flags);
>> +       if (!in_softirq())
>> +               spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vio->lock, flags);
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(vio_port_up);
> 
> Thanks,
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq()
  2014-10-21 23:56   ` Dave Kleikamp
@ 2014-10-22  0:16     ` Sowmini Varadhan
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sowmini Varadhan @ 2014-10-22  0:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dave Kleikamp; +Cc: Julian Calaby, David S. Miller, netdev, sparclinux

On (10/21/14 18:56), Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > 
> > Is gcc not smart enough to know that this variable isn't used before
> > it's set? (I assume it isn't used elsewhere in this function)
> 
> It probably assumes in_softirq() might evaluate differently in the each
> case.

yes, that's what I suspected too. I suppose it is possible
from the compiler's point of view that something in between 
might change the result of in_softirq() so that we may be 
using an uninit variable in the second call.

anyway, the warning was annoying, and would only numb the
user into ignoring other real issues, so I figured I might
as well silence the warning.

--Sowmini


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2014-10-22  0:16 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-10-21 14:16 [PATCHv4 3/4] sparc64: Avoid irqsave/restore on vio.lock if in_softirq() Sowmini Varadhan
2014-10-21 22:35 ` Julian Calaby
2014-10-21 22:39   ` Sowmini Varadhan
2014-10-21 22:42     ` Julian Calaby
2014-10-21 23:56   ` Dave Kleikamp
2014-10-22  0:16     ` Sowmini Varadhan

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).