Re: [PATCH v5 3.1.0-rc4-tip 18/26] uprobes: slot allocation.

[Srikar Dronamraju]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2011-09-27 14:37:59]:

> On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 17:33 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > +static unsigned long xol_take_insn_slot(struct uprobes_xol_area *area)
> > +{
> > +       unsigned long slot_addr, flags;
> > +       int slot_nr;
> > +
> > +       do {
> > +               spin_lock_irqsave(&area->slot_lock, flags);
> > +               slot_nr = find_first_zero_bit(area->bitmap, UINSNS_PER_PAGE);
> > +               if (slot_nr < UINSNS_PER_PAGE) {
> > +                       __set_bit(slot_nr, area->bitmap);
> > +                       slot_addr = area->vaddr +
> > +                                       (slot_nr * UPROBES_XOL_SLOT_BYTES);
> > +                       atomic_inc(&area->slot_count);
> > +               }
> > +               spin_unlock_irqrestore(&area->slot_lock, flags);
> > +               if (slot_nr >= UINSNS_PER_PAGE)
> > +                       xol_wait_event(area);
> > +
> > +       } while (slot_nr >= UINSNS_PER_PAGE);
> > +
> > +       return slot_addr;
> > +} 
> 
> Why isn't a find_first_bit() + set_and_test_bit() not sufficient? That
> is, what do you need that lock for?

yes, we could do without the lock to.
Will do this in the next patchset.

-- 
Thanks and Regards 
Srikar

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/