linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/7 V2] workqueue: simplify wq_update_unbound

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1431433955-3173-3-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 May 2015 20:32:30 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
To:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/7 V2] workqueue: simplify wq_update_unbound_numa()

wq_update_unbound_numa() is known be called with wq_pool_mutex held.

But wq_update_unbound_numa() requests wq->mutex before reading
wq->unbound_attrs, wq->numa_pwq_tbl[] and wq->dfl_pwq.  But these fields
were changed to be allowed being read with wq_pool_mutex held.  So we
simply remove the mutex_lock(&wq->mutex).

Without the dependence on the the mutex_lock(&wq->mutex), the test
of wq->unbound_attrs->no_numa can also be moved upward.

The old code need a long comment to describe the stableness of
@wq->unbound_attrs which is also guaranteed by wq_pool_mutex now,
so we don't need this such comment.

Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c | 20 +++++---------------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index f02b8ad..c8b9de0 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -3708,7 +3708,8 @@ static void wq_update_unbound_numa(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu,
 
 	lockdep_assert_held(&wq_pool_mutex);
 
-	if (!wq_numa_enabled || !(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND))
+	if (!wq_numa_enabled || !(wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND) ||
+	    wq->unbound_attrs->no_numa)
 		return;
 
 	/*
@@ -3719,10 +3720,6 @@ static void wq_update_unbound_numa(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu,
 	target_attrs = wq_update_unbound_numa_attrs_buf;
 	cpumask = target_attrs->cpumask;
 
-	mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
-	if (wq->unbound_attrs->no_numa)
-		goto out_unlock;
-
 	copy_workqueue_attrs(target_attrs, wq->unbound_attrs);
 	pwq = unbound_pwq_by_node(wq, node);
 
@@ -3734,33 +3731,26 @@ static void wq_update_unbound_numa(struct workqueue_struct *wq, int cpu,
 	 */
 	if (wq_calc_node_cpumask(wq->dfl_pwq->pool->attrs, node, cpu_off, cpumask)) {
 		if (cpumask_equal(cpumask, pwq->pool->attrs->cpumask))
-			goto out_unlock;
+			return;
 	} else {
 		goto use_dfl_pwq;
 	}
 
-	mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);
-
 	/* create a new pwq */
 	pwq = alloc_unbound_pwq(wq, target_attrs);
 	if (!pwq) {
 		pr_warn("workqueue: allocation failed while updating NUMA affinity of \"%s\"\n",
 			wq->name);
-		mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
 		goto use_dfl_pwq;
 	}
 
-	/*
-	 * Install the new pwq.  As this function is called only from CPU
-	 * hotplug callbacks and applying a new attrs is wrapped with
-	 * get/put_online_cpus(), @wq->unbound_attrs couldn't have changed
-	 * inbetween.
-	 */
+	/* Install the new pwq. */
 	mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
 	old_pwq = numa_pwq_tbl_install(wq, node, pwq);
 	goto out_unlock;
 
 use_dfl_pwq:
+	mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
 	spin_lock_irq(&wq->dfl_pwq->pool->lock);
 	get_pwq(wq->dfl_pwq);
 	spin_unlock_irq(&wq->dfl_pwq->pool->lock);
-- 
2.1.0

--
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/