linux-kernel - [PATCH] locking/rtmutex: Fix misleading comment

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20241008092606.GJ33184@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 11:26:06 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org,
	longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: [PATCH] locking/rtmutex: Fix misleading comment


Going through the RCU-boost and rtmutex code, I ran into this utterly
confusing comment. Fix it to avoid confusing future readers.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
index a6974d044593..587ede8073c0 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ bool __sched __rt_mutex_futex_unlock(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
 	}
 
 	/*
-	 * We've already deboosted, mark_wakeup_next_waiter() will
+	 * This will deboost, mark_wakeup_next_waiter() will
 	 * retain preempt_disabled when we drop the wait_lock, to
 	 * avoid inversion prior to the wakeup.  preempt_disable()
 	 * therein pairs with rt_mutex_postunlock().