[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1363344869-15732-5-git-send-email-walken@google.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 03:54:20 -0700
From: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 04/13] rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_read_failed
When trying to acquire a read lock, the RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS adjustment
doesn't cause other readers to block, so we never have to worry about waking
them back after canceling this adjustment in rwsem_down_read_failed().
We also never want to steal the lock in rwsem_down_read_failed(), so we
don't have to grab the wait_lock either.
Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
---
lib/rwsem.c | 22 ++--------------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/rwsem.c b/lib/rwsem.c
index fb658af1c12c..66f307e90761 100644
--- a/lib/rwsem.c
+++ b/lib/rwsem.c
@@ -182,7 +182,6 @@ try_again_write:
*/
struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_read_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
- enum rwsem_waiter_type type = RWSEM_WAITING_FOR_READ;
signed long adjustment = -RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS;
struct rwsem_waiter waiter;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
@@ -190,7 +189,7 @@ struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_read_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
/* set up my own style of waitqueue */
waiter.task = tsk;
- waiter.type = type;
+ waiter.type = RWSEM_WAITING_FOR_READ;
get_task_struct(tsk);
raw_spin_lock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
@@ -201,17 +200,9 @@ struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_read_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
/* we're now waiting on the lock, but no longer actively locking */
count = rwsem_atomic_update(adjustment, sem);
- /* If there are no active locks, wake the front queued process(es) up.
- *
- * Alternatively, if we're called from a failed down_write(), there
- * were already threads queued before us and there are no active
- * writers, the lock must be read owned; so we try to wake any read
- * locks that were queued ahead of us. */
+ /* If there are no active locks, wake the front queued process(es). */
if (count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
sem = __rwsem_do_wake(sem, RWSEM_WAKE_NO_ACTIVE);
- else if (count > RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS &&
- adjustment == -RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS)
- sem = __rwsem_do_wake(sem, RWSEM_WAKE_READ_OWNED);
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
@@ -220,15 +211,6 @@ struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_read_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
if (!waiter.task)
break;
-
- raw_spin_lock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
- /* Try to get the writer sem, may steal from the head writer: */
- if (type == RWSEM_WAITING_FOR_WRITE)
- if (try_get_writer_sem(sem, &waiter)) {
- raw_spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
- return sem;
- }
- raw_spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
schedule();
}
--
1.8.1.3
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists