qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 17/22] bitmap: add atomic test and clear


From: Fam Zheng
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 17/22] bitmap: add atomic test and clear
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 14:37:27 +0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

On Thu, 03/26 18:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> From: Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden>
> 
> The new bitmap_test_and_clear_atomic() function clears a range and
> returns whether or not the bits were set.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden>
> Message-Id: <address@hidden>
> [Test before xchg; then a full barrier is needed at the end just like
>  in the previous patch.  The barrier can be avoided if we did at least
>  one xchg.  - Paolo]
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
> ---
>  include/qemu/bitmap.h |  2 ++
>  util/bitmap.c         | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 45 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/qemu/bitmap.h b/include/qemu/bitmap.h
> index 3e0a4f3..86dd9cd 100644
> --- a/include/qemu/bitmap.h
> +++ b/include/qemu/bitmap.h
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
>   * bitmap_set(dst, pos, nbits)                       Set specified bit area
>   * bitmap_set_atomic(dst, pos, nbits)   Set specified bit area with atomic 
> ops
>   * bitmap_clear(dst, pos, nbits)             Clear specified bit area
> + * bitmap_test_and_clear_atomic(dst, pos, nbits)    Test and clear area
>   * bitmap_find_next_zero_area(buf, len, pos, n, mask)        Find bit free 
> area
>   */
>  
> @@ -229,6 +230,7 @@ static inline int bitmap_intersects(const unsigned long 
> *src1,
>  void bitmap_set(unsigned long *map, long i, long len);
>  void bitmap_set_atomic(unsigned long *map, long i, long len);
>  void bitmap_clear(unsigned long *map, long start, long nr);
> +bool bitmap_test_and_clear_atomic(unsigned long *map, long start, long nr);
>  unsigned long bitmap_find_next_zero_area(unsigned long *map,
>                                           unsigned long size,
>                                           unsigned long start,
> diff --git a/util/bitmap.c b/util/bitmap.c
> index e4957da..570758a 100644
> --- a/util/bitmap.c
> +++ b/util/bitmap.c
> @@ -232,6 +232,49 @@ void bitmap_clear(unsigned long *map, long start, long 
> nr)
>      }
>  }
>  
> +bool bitmap_test_and_clear_atomic(unsigned long *map, long start, long nr)
> +{
> +    unsigned long *p = map + BIT_WORD(start);
> +    const long size = start + nr;
> +    int bits_to_clear = BITS_PER_LONG - (start % BITS_PER_LONG);
> +    unsigned long mask_to_clear = BITMAP_FIRST_WORD_MASK(start);
> +    unsigned long dirty = 0;
> +    unsigned long old_bits;
> +
> +    /* First word */
> +    if (nr - bits_to_clear > 0) {
> +        old_bits = atomic_fetch_and(p, ~mask_to_clear);
> +        dirty |= old_bits & mask_to_clear;
> +        nr -= bits_to_clear;
> +        bits_to_clear = BITS_PER_LONG;
> +        mask_to_clear = ~0UL;
> +        p++;
> +    }
> +
> +    /* Full words */
> +    while (nr - bits_to_clear >= 0) {
> +        if (*p) {
> +            old_bits = atomic_xchg(p, 0);
> +            dirty |= old_bits;
> +        }
> +        nr -= bits_to_clear;
> +        p++;
> +    }
> +
> +    /* Last word */
> +    if (nr) {
> +        mask_to_clear &= BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(size);
> +        old_bits = atomic_fetch_and(p, ~mask_to_clear);
> +        dirty |= old_bits & mask_to_clear;
> +    } else {
> +        if (!dirty) {
> +            smp_mb();

Is this for the "*p" in the while loop? If so, and if the while loop is not
executed (bits contained in the first word, and clean), isn't this barrier
superfluous then?

Fam

> +        }
> +    }
> +
> +    return dirty;
> +}
> +
>  #define ALIGN_MASK(x,mask)      (((x)+(mask))&~(mask))
>  
>  /**
> -- 
> 2.3.3
> 
> 
> 



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]