Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 16 May 2023 11:37:15 +0200
From:   Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc:     Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.cz>,
        Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
        "Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 19/21] timer: Implement the hierarchical pull model
Message-ID: <20230516093715.cE8LUUcB@linutronix.de>
References: <20230510072817.116056-1-anna-maria@linutronix.de>
 <20230510072817.116056-20-anna-maria@linutronix.de>
 <ZFty1fNMlnuLk4qF@localhost.localdomain>
 <20230515101936.3amAvw0T@linutronix.de>
 <398d7731-f5ca-a34-9e4-77da60c49d21@linutronix.de>
 <20230515124133.XkKOksjW@linutronix.de>
 <ZGNL427cvjGQ-7dY@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZGNL427cvjGQ-7dY@localhost.localdomain>
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-05-16 11:24:51 [+0200], Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > This looks okay. I wouldn't suggest to hold the timer_base::lock or
> > tmigr_cpu::lock longer than needed. Both can be acquired independently
> > cross CPU and have explicit locking order. So it is fine.
> 
> 
>    LOCK(A)
>    LOCK(B)
>    UNLOCK(A)
>    UNLOCK(B)
> 
> 
> Cross rhymes aren't pretty in locking. They don't make the review smooth
> but yeah it's not incorrect either. And since I don't have a better way to
> propose...

tmigr_cpu::lock is required longer than timer_base::lock. You can't
acquire tmigr_cpu::lock -> timer_base::lock due to lock ordering.

So you follow the lock order, acquire what needed, drop everything else
to lower lock contention for others.

> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > 	Anna-Maria

Sebastian