Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-154998-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 13:33:44 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>, Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
	Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
	Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>,
	Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
	Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>,
	Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com>,
	Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] x86/rcu: Add rcu_preempt_count
Message-ID: <ZiecmBdOwHaaMufg@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20240328075318.83039-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
 <20240328075318.83039-10-jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
 <ZiZEcBEvK8NOQvwU@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAJhGHyBMYDWbRYp86wBu3x6Ry8HM2yiZxNv_WATwhzV+OO+ZFA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAJhGHyBMYDWbRYp86wBu3x6Ry8HM2yiZxNv_WATwhzV+OO+ZFA@mail.gmail.com>

Le Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 05:02:35PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan a écrit :
> Hello, Frederic
> 
> Thanks for reviewing.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 7:05 PM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > > +
> > > +/* We use the MSB mostly because its available */
> >
> > I think you can safely remove the "We " from all the comments :-)
> 
> The file is mainly copied from arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h.
> I will rephrase sentences in later iterations.
> 
> >
> > > +#define RCU_PREEMPT_UNLOCK_SPECIAL_INVERTED  0x80000000
> >
> > How about RCU_PREEMPT_UNLOCK_FASTPATH ?
> 
> 
> I'm not good at naming. But the MSB really means exactly the opposite
> of current->rcu_read_unlock_special and I think "UNLOCK_SPECIAL_INVERTED"
> fits the meaning.

Right but I tend to think a constant should tell what something is, not what
something is not.

FWIW, p->rcu_read_unlock_special could even be renamed to p->rcu_read_unlock_slowpath

Thanks.