rbtree: Split out the rbtree type definitions into <linux/rbtree_types.h>

So we have this header dependency problem on RT:

 - <linux/rtmutex.h> needs the definition of 'struct rb_root_cached'.
 - <linux/rbtree.h> includes <linux/kernel.h>, which includes <linux/spinlock.h>.

That works nicely for non-RT enabled kernels, but on RT enabled kernels
spinlocks are based on rtmutexes, which creates another circular header
dependency, as <linux/spinlocks.h> will require <linux/rtmutex.h>.

Split out the type definitions and move them into their own header file so
the rtmutex header can include just those.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.542123501@linutronix.de
This commit is contained in:
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2021-08-15 23:28:19 +02:00 committed by Ingo Molnar
parent cbcebf5bd3
commit 089050cafa
2 changed files with 36 additions and 29 deletions

View File

@ -17,24 +17,14 @@
#ifndef _LINUX_RBTREE_H
#define _LINUX_RBTREE_H
#include <linux/rbtree_types.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/stddef.h>
#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
struct rb_node {
unsigned long __rb_parent_color;
struct rb_node *rb_right;
struct rb_node *rb_left;
} __attribute__((aligned(sizeof(long))));
/* The alignment might seem pointless, but allegedly CRIS needs it */
struct rb_root {
struct rb_node *rb_node;
};
#define rb_parent(r) ((struct rb_node *)((r)->__rb_parent_color & ~3))
#define RB_ROOT (struct rb_root) { NULL, }
#define rb_entry(ptr, type, member) container_of(ptr, type, member)
#define RB_EMPTY_ROOT(root) (READ_ONCE((root)->rb_node) == NULL)
@ -112,23 +102,6 @@ static inline void rb_link_node_rcu(struct rb_node *node, struct rb_node *parent
typeof(*pos), field); 1; }); \
pos = n)
/*
* Leftmost-cached rbtrees.
*
* We do not cache the rightmost node based on footprint
* size vs number of potential users that could benefit
* from O(1) rb_last(). Just not worth it, users that want
* this feature can always implement the logic explicitly.
* Furthermore, users that want to cache both pointers may
* find it a bit asymmetric, but that's ok.
*/
struct rb_root_cached {
struct rb_root rb_root;
struct rb_node *rb_leftmost;
};
#define RB_ROOT_CACHED (struct rb_root_cached) { {NULL, }, NULL }
/* Same as rb_first(), but O(1) */
#define rb_first_cached(root) (root)->rb_leftmost

View File

@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */
#ifndef _LINUX_RBTREE_TYPES_H
#define _LINUX_RBTREE_TYPES_H
struct rb_node {
unsigned long __rb_parent_color;
struct rb_node *rb_right;
struct rb_node *rb_left;
} __attribute__((aligned(sizeof(long))));
/* The alignment might seem pointless, but allegedly CRIS needs it */
struct rb_root {
struct rb_node *rb_node;
};
/*
* Leftmost-cached rbtrees.
*
* We do not cache the rightmost node based on footprint
* size vs number of potential users that could benefit
* from O(1) rb_last(). Just not worth it, users that want
* this feature can always implement the logic explicitly.
* Furthermore, users that want to cache both pointers may
* find it a bit asymmetric, but that's ok.
*/
struct rb_root_cached {
struct rb_root rb_root;
struct rb_node *rb_leftmost;
};
#define RB_ROOT (struct rb_root) { NULL, }
#define RB_ROOT_CACHED (struct rb_root_cached) { {NULL, }, NULL }
#endif