Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 21 Aug 2020 19:41:32 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v7 14/19] lockdep: Take read/write status in consideration
 when generate chainkey
Message-ID: <20200821174132.GR3982@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200807074238.1632519-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com>
 <20200807074238.1632519-15-boqun.feng@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200807074238.1632519-15-boqun.feng@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


So far so good, excellent work.

On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 03:42:33PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> @@ -371,6 +371,21 @@ static struct hlist_head classhash_table[CLASSHASH_SIZE];
>  
>  static struct hlist_head chainhash_table[CHAINHASH_SIZE];
>  
> +/*
> + * the id of held_lock
> + */
> +static inline u16 hlock_id(struct held_lock *hlock)
> +{
> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS_BITS + 2 > 16);
> +
> +	return (hlock->class_idx | (hlock->read << MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS_BITS));
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int chain_hlock_class_idx(u16 hlock_id)
> +{
> +	return hlock_id & MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS;

But did that want to be:

	return hlock_id & (MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS-1);

?

> +}