linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 02/10] irq_work: Split type definition to its own header

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240712151732.GQ27299@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 17:17:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>, Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
	Tomas Glozar <tglozar@...hat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
	Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 02/10] irq_work: Split type definition to its own
 header

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 02:59:56PM +0200, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> A later commit will add a struct irq_work member to struct task_struct, which
> would require <linux/sched.h> to include the definition of struct
> irq_work.
> 
> Thanks to header dependency hell, incudling <linux/irq_work.h> in <linux/sched.h>
> results in defining inline helpers using not-yet-defined fields (mm_struct,
> task_struct, various task states...).
> 
> Break off the definition of struct irq_work into its own header file.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/irq_work.h       |  8 ++------
>  include/linux/irq_work_types.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 include/linux/irq_work_types.h
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/irq_work.h b/include/linux/irq_work.h
> index 136f2980cba30..7f6d2af360d91 100644
> --- a/include/linux/irq_work.h
> +++ b/include/linux/irq_work.h
> @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
>  #include <linux/smp_types.h>
>  #include <linux/rcuwait.h>
>  
> +#include <linux/irq_work_types.h>
> +
>  /*
>   * An entry can be in one of four states:
>   *
> @@ -14,12 +16,6 @@
>   * busy      NULL, 2 -> {free, claimed} : callback in progress, can be claimed
>   */
>  
> -struct irq_work {
> -	struct __call_single_node node;
> -	void (*func)(struct irq_work *);
> -	struct rcuwait irqwait;
> -};
> -
>  #define __IRQ_WORK_INIT(_func, _flags) (struct irq_work){	\
>  	.node = { .u_flags = (_flags), },			\
>  	.func = (_func),					\
> diff --git a/include/linux/irq_work_types.h b/include/linux/irq_work_types.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..108cbc514733b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/irq_work_types.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +#ifndef _LINUX_IRQ_WORK_TYPES_H
> +#define _LINUX_IRQ_WORK_TYPES_H
> +
> +#include <linux/smp_types.h>
> +#include <linux/rcuwait_types.h>
> +
> +struct irq_work {
> +	struct __call_single_node node;
> +	void (*func)(struct irq_work *);
> +	struct rcuwait irqwait;
> +};
> +
> +#endif

Since smp_types.h already mentions IRQ_WORK, given how I tangled the
whole things together, should we just put this struct there as well?