[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171110071255.GI20627@xz-mi>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 15:12:55 +0800
From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/swait: allow swake_up() to return
On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 11:06:53AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 09/11/2017 10:18, Peter Xu wrote:
> > Let swake_up() to return whether any of the waiters is waked up. One use
> > case of it would be:
> >
> > if (swait_active(wq)) {
> > swake_up(wq);
> > // do something when waiter is waked up
> > waked_up++;
> > }
> >
> > Logically it's possible that when reaching swake_up() the wait queue is
> > not active any more, and here doing something like waked_up++ would be
> > inaccurate. To correct it, we need an atomic version of it.
> >
> > With this patch, we can simply re-write it into:
> >
> > if (swake_up(wq)) {
> > // do something when waiter is waked up
> > waked_up++;
> > }
> >
> > After all we are checking swait_active() inside swake_up() too.
>
> Better subject:
>
> sched/swait: make swake_up() return whether there were any waiters
>
> I like this patch.
I'll see how PeterZ would like me to do next, or I can drop this patch
and send another clean up which is part of patch 2. Thanks for the
positive feedback and commenting. :-)
--
Peter Xu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists