Message-ID: <5711217A.6050003@hpe.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:14:34 -0400
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130109 Thunderbird/10.0.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
CC: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
        Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com>,
        Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hpe.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] lib/percpu-list: Per-cpu list with associated
 per-cpu locks
References: <1460501686-37096-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com> <1460501686-37096-2-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com> <20160413020929.GA23058@fixme-laptop.cn.ibm.com> <570E8419.7090909@hpe.com> <20160414233334.GA21026@fixme-laptop.cn.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160414233334.GA21026@fixme-laptop.cn.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:23
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Apr 2016 17:14:39.6333 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: TU4PR84MB0318
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1833
Lines: 58

On 04/14/2016 07:33 PM, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 01:38:33PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 04/12/2016 10:09 PM, Boqun Feng wrote:
>>> Hi Waiman,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 06:54:43PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> +
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Initialize the per-cpu list head
>>>> + */
>>>> +int init_pcpu_list_head(struct pcpu_list_head **ppcpu_head)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct pcpu_list_head *pcpu_head = alloc_percpu(struct pcpu_list_head);
>>>> +	int cpu;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!pcpu_head)
>>>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>>>> +
>>>> +	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> +		struct pcpu_list_head *head = per_cpu_ptr(pcpu_head, cpu);
>>>> +
>>>> +		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&head->list);
>>>> +		head->lock = __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(&head->lock);
>>>> +		lockdep_set_class(&head->lock,&percpu_list_key);
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>> +	*ppcpu_head = pcpu_head;
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>> +}
>>> The first time I looked at this patch, I had a hard time to figure out
>>> which "struct pcpu_list_head" pointer is pointing to percpu data(the
>>> pointer could be the parameter for per/this_cpu_ptr()), and which
>>> pointer is pointing to actual structure. For example, 'pcpu_head' and
>>> 'head' above are different types of pointers.
>>>
>>> So besides improving my code reading skills, I think the following patch
>>> helps ;-) Also it can resolve several splats of sparse when running
>>> 'make C=1 lib/'.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>> Yes, I think your patch is helpful. I will include your patch in my
>> patchset.
>>
> Given that a renaming will happen in the next version, carrying this as
> a standalone patch will be a pain, I think. So feel free to squash this
> into the patch #1, if that could make your job eariser ;-)
>
> Regards,
> Boqun
>
>

That is not a problem. I do want to acknowledge your contribution to 
this patchset.

Cheers,
Longman