On 2019-08-20, Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com> wrote:
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/kernel/printk/numlist.c
>> +/**
>> + * numlist_pop() - Remove the oldest node from the list.
>> + *
>> + * @nl: The numbered list from which to remove the tail node.
>> + *
>> + * The tail node can only be removed if two conditions are satisfied:
>> + *
>> + * * The node is not the only node on the list.
>> + * * The node is not busy.
>> + *
>> + * If, during this function, another task removes the tail, this function
>> + * will try again with the new tail.
>> + *
>> + * Return: The removed node or NULL if the tail node cannot be removed.
>> + */
>> +struct nl_node *numlist_pop(struct numlist *nl)
>> +{
>> +    unsigned long tail_id;
>> +    unsigned long next_id;
>> +    unsigned long r;
>> +
>> +    /* cA: #1 */
>> +    tail_id = atomic_long_read(&nl->tail_id);
>> +
>> +    for (;;) {
>> +            /* cB */
>> +            while (!numlist_read(nl, tail_id, NULL, &next_id)) {
>> +                    /*
>> +                     * @tail_id is invalid. Try again with an
>> +                     * updated value.
>> +                     */
>> +
>> +                    cpu_relax();
>> +
>> +                    /* cA: #2 */
>> +                    tail_id = atomic_long_read(&nl->tail_id);
>> +            }
>
> The above while-cycle basically does the same as the upper for-cycle.
> It tries again with freshly loaded nl->tail_id. The following code
> looks easier to follow:
>
>       do {
>               tail_id = atomic_long_read(&nl->tail_id);
>
>               /*
>                * Read might fail when the tail node has been removed
>                * and reused in parallel.
>                */
>               if (!numlist_read(nl, tail_id, NULL, &next_id))
>                       continue;
>
>               /* Make sure the node is not the only node on the list. */
>               if (next_id == tail_id)
>                       return NULL;
>
>               /* cC: Make sure the node is not busy. */
>               if (nl->busy(tail_id, nl->busy_arg))
>                       return NULL;
>
>       while (atomic_long_cmpxchg_relaxed(&nl->tail_id, tail_id, next_id) !=
>                       tail_id);
>
>       /* This should never fail. The node is ours. */
>       return nl->node(tail_id, nl->node_arg);

You will see that pattern in several cmpxchg() loops. The reason I chose
to do it that way was so that I could make use of the return value of
the failed cmpcxhg(). This avoids an unnecessary LOAD and establishes a
data dependency between the failed cmpxchg() and the following
numlist_read(). I suppose none of that matters since we only care about
the case where cmpxchg() is successful.

I agree that your variation is easier to read.

>> +            /* Make sure the node is not the only node on the list. */
>> +            if (next_id == tail_id)
>> +                    return NULL;
>> +
>> +            /*
>> +             * cC:
>> +             *
>> +             * Make sure the node is not busy.
>> +             */
>> +            if (nl->busy(tail_id, nl->busy_arg))
>> +                    return NULL;
>> +
>> +            r = atomic_long_cmpxchg_relaxed(&nl->tail_id,
>> +                                            tail_id, next_id);
>> +            if (r == tail_id)
>> +                    break;
>> +
>> +            /* cA: #3 */
>> +            tail_id = r;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    return nl->node(tail_id, nl->node_arg);
>
> If I get it correctly, the above nl->node() call should never fail.
> The node has been removed from the list and nobody else could
> touch it. It is pretty useful information and it might be worth
> mention it in a comment.

You are correct and I will add a comment.

> PS: I am scratching my head around the patchset. I'll try Peter's
> approach and comment independent things is separate mails.

I think it is an excellent approach. Especially when discussing the
memory barriers.

John Ogness

Reply via email to