[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140115074420.GV31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 08:44:20 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Waiman.Long@...com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, riel@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, davidlohr@...com, hpa@...or.com,
aswin@...com, scott.norton@...com
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] mutex: In mutex_can_spin_on_owner(), return false if
task need_resched()
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 04:33:08PM -0800, Jason Low wrote:
> The mutex_can_spin_on_owner() function should also return false if the
> task needs to be rescheduled.
>
While I was staring at mutex_can_spin_on_owner(); don't we need this?
kernel/locking/mutex.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index 4dd6e4c219de..480d2f437964 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -214,8 +214,10 @@ static inline int mutex_can_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock)
rcu_read_lock();
owner = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->owner);
- if (owner)
+ if (owner) {
+ smp_read_barrier_depends();
retval = owner->on_cpu;
+ }
rcu_read_unlock();
/*
* if lock->owner is not set, the mutex owner may have just acquired
--
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