Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/11] locking/ww_mutex: Set use_ww_ctx even when
 locking without a context
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Nicolai_H=c3=a4hnle?= <nhaehnle@gmail.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
References: <1480601214-26583-1-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com>
 <1480601214-26583-5-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com>
 <20161206152537.GV3045@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <239fa361-331a-a7b6-9a0d-a6baa19a5003@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Nicolai_H=c3=a4hnle?= <Nicolai.Haehnle@amd.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <5061ed62-fd3d-eb22-d90d-8d7a45817fbd@linux.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 08:53:51 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <239fa361-331a-a7b6-9a0d-a6baa19a5003@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1667
Lines: 36

Op 16-12-16 om 14:17 schreef Nicolai H?hnle:
> On 06.12.2016 16:25, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 03:06:47PM +0100, Nicolai H?hnle wrote:
>>
>>> @@ -640,10 +640,11 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
>>>      struct mutex_waiter waiter;
>>>      unsigned long flags;
>>>      bool first = false;
>>> -    struct ww_mutex *ww;
>>>      int ret;
>>>
>>> -    if (use_ww_ctx) {
>>> +    if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx) {
>>> +        struct ww_mutex *ww;
>>> +
>>>          ww = container_of(lock, struct ww_mutex, base);
>>>          if (unlikely(ww_ctx == READ_ONCE(ww->ctx)))
>>>              return -EALREADY;
>>
>> So I don't see the point of removing *ww from the function scope, we can
>> still compute that container_of() even if !ww_ctx, right? That would
>> safe a ton of churn below, adding all those struct ww_mutex declarations
>> and container_of() casts.
>>
>> (and note that the container_of() is a fancy NO-OP because base is the
>> first member).
>
> Sorry for taking so long to get back to you.
>
> In my experience, the undefined behavior sanitizer in GCC for userspace programs complains about merely casting a pointer to the wrong type. I never went into the standards rabbit hole to figure out the details. It might be a C++ only thing (ubsan cannot tell the difference otherwise anyway), but that was the reason for doing the change in this more complicated way.
>
> Are you sure that this is defined behavior in C? If so, I'd be happy to go with the version that has less churn.
>
> I'll also get rid of those ww_mutex_lock* wrapper functions. 

ww_ctx = use_ww_ctx ? container_of : NULL ?