Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To:     'Peter Zijlstra' <peterz@infradead.org>,
        'Andy Lutomirski' <luto@kernel.org>
CC:     "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        'Ingo Molnar' <mingo@kernel.org>,
        'Thomas Gleixner' <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        'Ingo Molnar' <mingo@redhat.com>,
        'Borislav Petkov' <bp@alien8.de>,
        'H Peter Anvin' <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        'linux-kernel' <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        'x86' <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v10 6/6] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by
 kernel parameter
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v10 6/6] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by
 kernel parameter
Thread-Index: AQHVoA1uR0NpEjA1wUmtm7eAgTQzs6eVqSUAgAB0jYCAAEXyAP//gC6AgAGn1ICAAEz+gP//pIgggACuT4CAAAUeAIAADDWAgB6dr4CAAB9eQIAADuCQ
Date:   Thu, 12 Dec 2019 19:46:25 +0000
Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7F5013AA@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
References: <20191121060444.GA55272@gmail.com>
 <20191121130153.GS4097@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20191121171214.GD12042@gmail.com>
 <20191121173444.GA5581@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <20191122105141.GY4114@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20191122152715.GA1909@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7F4DD20D@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <20191122202345.GC2844@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20191122204204.GA192370@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
 <CALCETrUBomb2_2xyX-tZUD84smtDWH6e16zSN1qupkv-DWu5kw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191212085755.GR2827@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7F5011B2@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7F5011B2@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.2.0.6
dlp-reaction: no-action
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

>> If anything we could switch the entire bitmap interface to unsigned int,
>> but I'm not sure that'd actually help much.
>
> As we've been looking for potential split lock issues in kernel code, most of
> the ones we found relate to callers who have <=32 bits and thus stick:
>
>	u32 flags;
>
> in their structure.  So it would solve those places, and fix any future code
> where someone does the same thing.

If different architectures can do better with 8-bit/16-bit/32-bit/64-bit instructions
to manipulate bitmaps, then perhaps this is justification to make all the
functions operate on "bitmap_t" and have each architecture provide the
typedef for their favorite width.

-Tony