[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230817065950.yWBqlw4Y@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 08:59:50 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bsegall@...gle.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, swood@...hat.com,
bristot@...hat.com, dietmar.eggemann@....com, mingo@...hat.com,
jstultz@...gle.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com, mgorman@...e.de,
rostedt@...dmis.org, vschneid@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, longman@...hat.com, will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] locking/rtmutex: Avoid PI state recursion through
sched_submit_work()
On 2023-08-16 16:58:18 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I've ended up with the below, but it is quite horrible.. but let me go
> stare at the futex wreckage before trying to clean things up.
What about
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwbase_rt.c b/kernel/locking/rwbase_rt.c
index f8a194e7ec9e9..b5e881250fec5 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwbase_rt.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwbase_rt.c
@@ -241,6 +241,8 @@ static int __sched rwbase_write_lock(struct rwbase_rt *rwb,
/* Force readers into slow path */
atomic_sub(READER_BIAS, &rwb->readers);
+ rt_mutex_pre_schedule();
+
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rtm->wait_lock, flags);
if (__rwbase_write_trylock(rwb))
goto out_unlock;
@@ -252,6 +254,7 @@ static int __sched rwbase_write_lock(struct rwbase_rt *rwb,
if (rwbase_signal_pending_state(state, current)) {
rwbase_restore_current_state();
__rwbase_write_unlock(rwb, 0, flags);
+ rt_mutex_post_schedule();
trace_contention_end(rwb, -EINTR);
return -EINTR;
}
@@ -270,6 +273,7 @@ static int __sched rwbase_write_lock(struct rwbase_rt *rwb,
out_unlock:
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtm->wait_lock, flags);
+ rt_mutex_post_schedule();
return 0;
}
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists