Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] powerpc/tm: Remove msr_tm_active()

Michael Neuling [off-list ref] writes:

On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 19:59 -0300, Breno Leitao wrote:

quoted

Currently msr_tm_active() is a wrapper around MSR_TM_ACTIVE() if
CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM is set, or it is just a function that
returns false if CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM is not set.

This function is not necessary, since MSR_TM_ACTIVE() just do the same,
checking for the TS bits and does not require any TM facility.

This patchset remove every instance of msr_tm_active() and replaced it
by MSR_TM_ACTIVE().

Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>

Patch looks good... one minor nit below...

quoted

 
-	if (!msr_tm_active(regs->msr) &&
-		!current->thread.load_fp && !loadvec(current->thread))
+	if (!current->thread.load_fp && !loadvec(current->thread)) {
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM
+		if (!MSR_TM_ACTIVE(regs->msr))
+			return;

Can you make a MSR_TM_ACTIVE() that returns false when
!CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM. Then you don't need this inline #ifdef.

Is that safe?

I see ~50 callers of MSR_TM_ACTIVE(), are they all inside #ifdef TM ?

cheers