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;
Subject: Re: [patch V5 34/72] locking/rwlock: Provide RT variant
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
CC:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
References: <20210815203225.710392609@linutronix.de>
 <20210815211303.882793524@linutronix.de>
From:   Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <d456062c-d5d4-be8a-d960-1a1d43f63456@huawei.com>
Date:   Sat, 11 Sep 2021 10:59:11 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210815211303.882793524@linutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2021/8/16 5:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> Similar to rw_semaphores on RT the rwlock substitution is not writer fair
> because it's not feasible to have a writer inherit it's priority to
> multiple readers. Readers blocked on a writer follow the normal rules of
> priority inheritance. Like RT spinlocks RT rwlocks are state preserving
> across the slow lock operations (contended case).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> ---
> V5: Add missing might_sleep() and fix lockdep init (Sebastian)
> ---
>   include/linux/rwlock_rt.h       |  140 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   include/linux/rwlock_types.h    |   49 ++++++++++----
>   include/linux/spinlock_rt.h     |    2
>   kernel/Kconfig.locks            |    2
>   kernel/locking/spinlock.c       |    7 ++
>   kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c |    5 +
>   kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c    |  131 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   7 files changed, 323 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>   create mode 100644 include/linux/rwlock_rt.h
> ---
.....
> +
> +int __sched rt_rwlock_is_contended(rwlock_t *rwlock)
> +{
> +	return rw_base_is_contended(&rwlock->rwbase);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rt_rwlock_is_contended);
> +

rt_rwlock_is_conted() exported but not declared in the header file?
Is this a special design or a mistake?

Thanks
Xiaoming Ni