locking/rwsem: Improve reader wakeup code
In __rwsem_do_wake(), the reader wakeup code will assume a writer has stolen the lock if the active reader/writer count is not 0. However, this is not as reliable an indicator as the original "< RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS" check. If another reader is present, the code will still break out and exit even if the writer is gone. This patch changes it to check the same "< RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS" condition to reduce the chance of false positive. Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> Cc: Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hpe.com> Cc: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1463534783-38814-5-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
fb6a44f33b
commit
bf7b4c472d
@ -156,9 +156,14 @@ __rwsem_mark_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem,
|
||||
oldcount = atomic_long_add_return(adjustment, &sem->count) - adjustment;
|
||||
|
||||
if (unlikely(oldcount < RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)) {
|
||||
/* A writer stole the lock. Undo our reader grant. */
|
||||
if (atomic_long_sub_return(adjustment, &sem->count) &
|
||||
RWSEM_ACTIVE_MASK)
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* If the count is still less than RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS
|
||||
* after removing the adjustment, it is assumed that
|
||||
* a writer has stolen the lock. We have to undo our
|
||||
* reader grant.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (atomic_long_add_return(-adjustment, &sem->count) <
|
||||
RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
|
||||
goto out;
|
||||
/* Last active locker left. Retry waking readers. */
|
||||
goto try_reader_grant;
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user