[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <172980406969.1442.8080555865587712726.tip-bot2@tip-bot2>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 21:07:49 -0000
From: "tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra" <tip-bot2@...utronix.de>
To: linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [tip: locking/core] locking/rtmutex: Fix misleading comment
The following commit has been merged into the locking/core branch of tip:
Commit-ID: d12b802f183667d4c28589314c99c380a458d57e
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/d12b802f183667d4c28589314c99c380a458d57e
Author: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
AuthorDate: Tue, 08 Oct 2024 11:26:06 +02:00
Committer: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CommitterDate: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 23:03:30 +02:00
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.
[ tglx: Wordsmithed the comment ]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241008092606.GJ33184@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
index a6974d0..7e79258 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c
@@ -175,10 +175,10 @@ bool __sched __rt_mutex_futex_unlock(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
}
/*
- * We've already deboosted, 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().
+ * mark_wakeup_next_waiter() deboosts and retains preemption
+ * disabled when dropping the wait_lock, to avoid inversion prior
+ * to the wakeup. preempt_disable() therein pairs with the
+ * preempt_enable() in rt_mutex_postunlock().
*/
mark_wakeup_next_waiter(wqh, lock);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists