[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    Subject[PATCH v2 3/9] sched: Replace spin_unlock_wait() with lock/unlock pair
    There is no agreed-upon definition of spin_unlock_wait()'s semantics,
    and it appears that all callers could do just as well with a lock/unlock
    pair. This commit therefore replaces the spin_unlock_wait() call in
    do_task_dead() with spin_lock() followed immediately by spin_unlock().
    This should be safe from a performance perspective because the lock is
    this tasks ->pi_lock, and this is called only after the task exits.

    Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <>
    Cc: Ingo Molnar <>
    Cc: Peter Zijlstra <>
    Cc: Will Deacon <>
    Cc: Alan Stern <>
    Cc: Andrea Parri <>
    Cc: Linus Torvalds <>
    [ paulmck: Replace leading smp_mb() with smp_mb__before_spinlock(),
    courtesy of Arnd Bergmann's noting its odd location. ]
    kernel/sched/core.c | 5 +++--
    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

    diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
    index e91138fcde86..48a8760fedf4 100644
    --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
    +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
    @@ -3460,8 +3460,9 @@ void __noreturn do_task_dead(void)
    * To avoid it, we have to wait for releasing tsk->pi_lock which
    * is held by try_to_wake_up()
    - smp_mb();
    - raw_spin_unlock_wait(&current->pi_lock);
    + smp_mb__before_spinlock();
    + raw_spin_lock_irq(&current->pi_lock);
    + raw_spin_unlock_irq(&current->pi_lock);

    /* Causes final put_task_struct in finish_task_switch(): */
     \ /
      Last update: 2017-07-06 01:33    [W:10.006 / U:0.044 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site