Re: [PATCH v4 03/12] xen/spinlock: introduce new type for recursive spinlocks

[Juergen Gross]

On 21.12.23 11:34, Jan Beulich wrote:

On 12.12.2023 13:57, Julien Grall wrote:

On 12/12/2023 09:47, Juergen Gross wrote:

@@ -109,12 +109,16 @@ struct lock_profile_qhead {
       spinlock_t l = _SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(NULL);                                
 \
       static struct lock_profile __lock_profile_data_##l = _LOCK_PROFILE(l);   
 \
       _LOCK_PROFILE_PTR(l)
+#define DEFINE_RSPINLOCK(l)                                                   \
+    rspinlock_t l = _SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(NULL);                                \
+    static struct lock_profile __lock_profile_data_##l = _LOCK_PROFILE(l);    \
+    _LOCK_PROFILE_PTR(l)

+#define __spin_lock_init_prof(s, l, locktype)                                 \

-#define spin_lock_init_prof(s, l) \

If I am not mistaken the double-underscore prefix is a violation in
MISRA. So can this be renamed to:

spin_lock_init_prof__()?

Is the new parameter needed at all? Can't we use typeof((s)->l) in place of
passing the type explicitly?

IMO spin_lock_init_prof() should be usable for spinlock_t only, and
rspin_lock_init_prof() for rspinlock_t only. Using typeof() would make
either of them usable for both types.


Juergen

OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature