Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-53994-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 14:02:42 -0800
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, "Fabio M. De Francesco"
	<fabio.maria.de.francesco@linux.intel.com>, Peter Zijlstra
	<peterz@infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
CC: <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "Jonathan
 Cameron" <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>, "Fabio M. De Francesco"
	<fabio.maria.de.francesco@linux.intel.com>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2 v2] cleanup: Add cond_guard() to conditional guards
Message-ID: <65c15b025484f_3744792942a@iweiny-mobl.notmuch>
References: <20240205142613.23914-1-fabio.maria.de.francesco@linux.intel.com>
 <20240205142613.23914-2-fabio.maria.de.francesco@linux.intel.com>
 <65c130d7c4c52_4e7f5294d3@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <65c130d7c4c52_4e7f5294d3@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?m0hdJGtMG6PjRkUchRoY35u2WfGNM37O9FE2RemmH8haF9AKYBKnBEoypkvk?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?iu67rId73b6L3FcEjyCVwjKycKHjvqnDUfotE6ts/NjenU/p0x02jRnwtFQi?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fjAr2rnBSXalS+YUkTwzg0oiS/b3wrvMr/lv2ljoiXDargttxPAf9l97ZlvW?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?+FbGRf5WJ2FquBR8iwBrltFoyi7cAUWA8BFcyKxpZ+Fh8zGOT0SQaZGmIHsL?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?CrXXCBM37aHBkissaZOPtt+R7Q7clEy6MXi1XtEPT563mBvhOtm/g7IcOvSr?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?wNefe1r535GH0bp/FTTRLICo4ETc+K4wOWCM3H22eyZtoch8lsa4SrjtK3mu?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?sOA2C6+waFsQOqqtrsFpdFv29JQN7C2yQYy+DkL5aXDLB3JqdC6ObYyZ0J3x?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?7glA/yraJtAWm7ZyvU0P635wpf0y2NVdN1UEWN943URdLK8IYAAhWbVxl4sS?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?h8+Zt/fN/zVYGY2rhlaywuewXMWtidgkPR9Q+B0b56W1l7CBx1YnXW1Qzbw0?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ytBoouc/fyVOt9cSjQn1v6Q2G779KVtIVTxgjYny7u8SDu6bT0S3GtGkc5uK?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?yagan9kaRICcoJAfncYj9HBiwrCehHkC0U9d0xdA0o0EFTpk6+SJ8zlk0hKy?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?BkkQHc1nLOJkTZNzVR/MFYZdGb8ZzlYWl69pos0w2cMryKIqxb539ja5wIqV?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?QrBWf5wV+BsghbP9cm7nDus4Vp8KW7KJRpyYK3RPHlKD5S0C0BiOJBmx7oJd?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?FhjU/G8o+FWdv1Rs/Bv13jKL3aVP99GaWg70QnxRfkNFKTiWuxXUv7xeO8Vu?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?U53XmVINa7+PP3dDM+5eRGM+bMMWb9h0Ch7jn+hT884h5jlyO9OwBL52/lJ/?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?c2X81XYcvDoeYzz0O9gFinxLTlxrjQ887Gw+/dA/FeiuWZILngT0flXIN/+K?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ySO5Sj6a6k1Yv7Dhfvd0DKTxioqHo5768CMh5djKLZ1KcemmfAEWYkQgu3+x?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6jOjf4Ue9cQdBaB5Fsvugp4xKXSqcVNoy2iPyNQQfa0LNA9V0R8gJoIRpl1i?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?81L/ePgn5aRgpeVZjKu+IY5VhkYYCJ4ADHLv33qYJubmq9yfSnoZUjcAEAW7?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?0gTSIaQAv/yP2zkn2uFaiEdZq217k5G+rPHazjmKvTUq5ZAqsQTH137gzCKa?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?2Grk5t4hpQuti01e8swxGao8vDoGpxqHf0ZcrqD6i+RLj/OPuaOhfsxUQlkD?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?CL+wsajE/zc9WRhUomvags6VESrbYLA4vw+C3WDwHHK8eAAy7mmp0s1uzIHc?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?jAD0S8koPI7wMaofUB8Zz8tmjSJMFDQj6MR5LQzZSq5rijbyubqQ+ENLv4v0?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?dK1Rc0eLEIzCafk5xE6y+tjULNNoOVJCRGZfKGgCmNylMywfq1td+yQX3Hnp?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?+wLpnQc3YKFKFTnSCbvPj7LZpEjtK9vDe3j2qLbZj25Rwv0PLQTg+3YdI3qM?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?jKlcLOBRfQX5o1Mt1GGZ0hb1dsdK/gDga5P+aCxxWmMP4r26eiJWvkuORO1/?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?h8sq4PkI4lFPaPnbIPu/023txN04y+qJQlCgQhyG?=
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c44461a6-a19f-4bcf-5ffa-08dc26962ee0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SA1PR11MB6733.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Feb 2024 22:02:45.4852
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: Ck0A8Ew0kg836atBSvUsYNkX41ymIwedsI/C96hfpaHGfEQkuFsNR5wwh6sM1mI8y2G9gIAu5DVWbPu609IiaQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: PH0PR11MB5626
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com

Dan Williams wrote:
> Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > Add cond_guard() macro to conditional guards.
> > 
> > cond_guard() is a guard to be used with the conditional variants of locks,
> > like down_read_trylock() or mutex_lock_interruptible().
> > 
> > It takes a statement (or more statements in a block) that is passed to its
> > second argument. That statement (or block) is executed if waiting for a
> > lock is interrupted or if a _trylock() fails in case of contention.
> > 
> > Usage example:
> > 
> > 	cond_guard(rwsem_read_try, { printk(...); return 0; }, &semaphore);
> > 
> > Consistently with the other guards, locks are unlocked at the exit of the
> > scope where cond_guard() is called.
> > 
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > Suggested-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fabio.maria.de.francesco@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/cleanup.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/cleanup.h b/include/linux/cleanup.h
> > index c2d09bc4f976..88af56600325 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/cleanup.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/cleanup.h
> > @@ -134,6 +134,16 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##ext##_constructor(_init_args) \
> >   *	an anonymous instance of the (guard) class, not recommended for
> >   *	conditional locks.
> >   *
> > + * cond_guard(name, fail, args...):
> > + *	a guard to be used with the conditional variants of locks, like
> > + *	down_read_trylock() or mutex_lock_interruptible. 'fail' are one or more
> > + *	statements that are executed when waiting for a lock is interrupted or
> > + *	when a _trylock() fails in case of contention.
> > + *
> > + *	Example:
> > + *
> > + *		cond_guard(rwsem_read_try, { printk(...); return 0; }, &semaphore);
> 
> That _fail argument likely needs to be a statement expression for the
> multi-statement case.

You mean ({ ... }) as discussed here?

https://lore.kernel.org/all/65c1578c76def_37447929456@iweiny-mobl.notmuch/

> 
> > + *
> >   * scoped_guard (name, args...) { }:
> >   *	similar to CLASS(name, scope)(args), except the variable (with the
> >   *	explicit name 'scope') is declard in a for-loop such that its scope is
> > @@ -165,6 +175,10 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##ext##_constructor(_init_args) \
> >  
> >  #define __guard_ptr(_name) class_##_name##_lock_ptr
> >  
> > +#define cond_guard(_name, _fail, args...) \
> > +	CLASS(_name, scope)(args); \
> > +	if (!__guard_ptr(_name)(&scope)) _fail
> 
> No, as I stated before this is broken for usages of:
> 
>     if () cond_guard() else if ()
> 
> The 'else' in the definition is critical, this builds for me (untested):

I did not test Fabios work directly but I don't understand this example.
It seems like your suggestion does nothing useful.  The cond_guard()
becomes a single statement like...

	if ()
		cond_guard();
	else ...

.. And can't protect anything.  NOTE From my understanding of
cond_guard() as defined, the ';' must be used as part of cond_guard() and
should complete the internal macro 'if' statement.

I think this would work:

	if () {
		cond_guard();
		... do locked stuff ...
	} else ...

> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/cleanup.h b/include/linux/cleanup.h
> index 88af56600325..665407498781 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cleanup.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cleanup.h
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##ext##_constructor(_init_args) \
>   *
>   *	Example:
>   *
> - *		cond_guard(rwsem_read_try, { printk(...); return 0; }, &semaphore);
> + *		cond_guard(rwsem_read_try, ({ printk(...); return 0; }), &semaphore);
>   *
>   * scoped_guard (name, args...) { }:
>   *	similar to CLASS(name, scope)(args), except the variable (with the
> @@ -177,7 +177,8 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##ext##_constructor(_init_args) \
>  
>  #define cond_guard(_name, _fail, args...) \
>  	CLASS(_name, scope)(args); \
> -	if (!__guard_ptr(_name)(&scope)) _fail
> +	if (!__guard_ptr(_name)(&scope)) _fail; \

Building on what I found for scoped_cond_guard() this should be

> +	if (!__guard_ptr(_name)(&scope)) { _fail; }

And drop the else.  The else needs to clearly be part of an outside if in
your example.

Ira

> +	else
>  
>  #define scoped_guard(_name, args...)					\
>  	for (CLASS(_name, scope)(args),					\