[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230422103618.GE1214746@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2023 12:36:18 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Qais Yousef <qyousef@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
Connor O'Brien <connoro@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/14] locking/mutex: Expose mutex_owner()
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 04:25:03AM +0000, John Stultz wrote:
> include/linux/mutex.h | 2 ++
> kernel/locking/mutex.c | 5 +++++
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/mutex.h b/include/linux/mutex.h
> index 8f226d460f51..ebdc59cb0bf6 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mutex.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mutex.h
> @@ -118,6 +118,8 @@ do { \
> extern void __mutex_init(struct mutex *lock, const char *name,
> struct lock_class_key *key);
>
> +extern struct task_struct *mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock);
> +
> /**
> * mutex_is_locked - is the mutex locked
> * @lock: the mutex to be queried
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> index 45f1b7519f63..cbc34d5f4486 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> @@ -81,6 +81,11 @@ static inline struct task_struct *__mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock)
> return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~MUTEX_FLAGS);
> }
>
> +struct task_struct *mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock)
> +{
> + return __mutex_owner(lock);
> +}
> +
> static inline struct task_struct *__owner_task(unsigned long owner)
> {
> return (struct task_struct *)(owner & ~MUTEX_FLAGS);
Urgh, no.
It exposes mutex_owner() far wider than it should be, and also it turns
what should be a simple load into a function call :/
Looking at the lastest patches I have here this used to be an inline in
kernel/locking/mutex.h and kernel/sched/core.c got to #include
"../locking/mutex.h".
Powered by blists - more mailing lists