[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <162573375542.395.13930081717267627387.tip-bot2@tip-bot2>
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2021 08:42:35 -0000
From: "tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra" <tip-bot2@...utronix.de>
To: linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Yanfei Xu <yanfei.xu@...driver.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [tip: locking/core] locking/mutex: Fix HANDOFF condition
The following commit has been merged into the locking/core branch of tip:
Commit-ID: 048661a1f963e9517630f080687d48af79ed784c
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/048661a1f963e9517630f080687d48af79ed784c
Author: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
AuthorDate: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 17:35:18 +02:00
Committer: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CommitterDate: Wed, 07 Jul 2021 13:53:24 +02:00
locking/mutex: Fix HANDOFF condition
Yanfei reported that setting HANDOFF should not depend on recomputing
@first, only on @first state. Which would then give:
if (ww_ctx || !first)
first = __mutex_waiter_is_first(lock, &waiter);
if (first)
__mutex_set_flag(lock, MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF);
But because 'ww_ctx || !first' is basically 'always' and the test for
first is relatively cheap, omit that first branch entirely.
Reported-by: Yanfei Xu <yanfei.xu@...driver.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Reviewed-by: Yanfei Xu <yanfei.xu@...driver.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210630154114.896786297@infradead.org
---
kernel/locking/mutex.c | 15 +++++----------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index cab7163..8c3d499 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -909,7 +909,6 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
struct ww_acquire_ctx *ww_ctx, const bool use_ww_ctx)
{
struct mutex_waiter waiter;
- bool first = false;
struct ww_mutex *ww;
int ret;
@@ -988,6 +987,8 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
set_current_state(state);
for (;;) {
+ bool first;
+
/*
* Once we hold wait_lock, we're serialized against
* mutex_unlock() handing the lock off to us, do a trylock
@@ -1016,15 +1017,9 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock);
schedule_preempt_disabled();
- /*
- * ww_mutex needs to always recheck its position since its waiter
- * list is not FIFO ordered.
- */
- if (ww_ctx || !first) {
- first = __mutex_waiter_is_first(lock, &waiter);
- if (first)
- __mutex_set_flag(lock, MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF);
- }
+ first = __mutex_waiter_is_first(lock, &waiter);
+ if (first)
+ __mutex_set_flag(lock, MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF);
set_current_state(state);
/*
Powered by blists - more mailing lists