[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878s1j3odt.ffs@tglx>
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2021 16:35:58 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: [patch 58/63] futex: Prevent requeue_pi() lock nesting issue on RT
On Mon, Aug 02 2021 at 15:10, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 02:56:09PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> static inline int futex_requeue_pi_wakeup_sync(struct futex_q *q)
>> {
>> + int old, new;
>>
>> + old = atomic_read_acquire(&q->requeue_state);
>> + do {
>> /* Is requeue done already? */
>> + if (old >= Q_REQUEUE_PI_DONE)
>> break;
>
> I think that can be: return old; for slightly simpler code.
Yes.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists