Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1396586
| From | Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | [PATCH 4/4] locking/rwsem: Rework zeroing reader waiter->task |
| Date | 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rwLCa-5YS-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rwLsu-5sI-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Readers that are awoken will expect a nil ->task indicating
that a wakeup has occurred. There is a mismatch between the
smp_mb() and its documentation, in that the serialization is
done between reading the task and the nil store. Furthermore,
in addition to having the overlapping of loads and stores to
waiter->task guaranteed to be ordered within that CPU, both
wake_up_process() originally and now wake_q_add() already
imply barriers upon successful calls, which serves the comment.
Just atomically do a xchg() and simplify the whole thing. We can
use relaxed semantics as before mentioned in addition to the
barrier provided by wake_q_add(), delaying there is no risk in
reordering with the actual wakeup.
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
---
kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 17 +++++------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 1b8c1285a2aa..96e53cb4a4db 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -126,7 +126,6 @@ __rwsem_mark_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem,
enum rwsem_wake_type wake_type, struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
{
struct rwsem_waiter *waiter;
- struct task_struct *tsk;
struct list_head *next;
long oldcount, woken, loop, adjustment;
@@ -190,24 +189,18 @@ __rwsem_mark_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem,
next = sem->wait_list.next;
loop = woken;
do {
+ struct task_struct *tsk;
+
waiter = list_entry(next, struct rwsem_waiter, list);
next = waiter->list.next;
- tsk = waiter->task;
- /*
- * Make sure we do not wakeup the next reader before
- * setting the nil condition to grant the next reader;
- * otherwise we could miss the wakeup on the other
- * side and end up sleeping again. See the pairing
- * in rwsem_down_read_failed().
- */
- smp_mb();
- waiter->task = NULL;
+
+ tsk = xchg_relaxed(&waiter->task, NULL);
wake_q_add(wake_q, tsk);
} while (--loop);
sem->wait_list.next = next;
next->prev = &sem->wait_list;
- out:
+out:
return sem;
}
--
2.8.1
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH -tip 0/4] locking/rwsem (xadd): Reader waiter optimizations Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:00 +0200
[PATCH 4/4] locking/rwsem: Rework zeroing reader waiter->task Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 4/4] locking/rwsem: Rework zeroing reader waiter->task Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 10:00 +0200
[PATCH 3/4] locking/rwsem: Enable lockless waiter wakeup(s) Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3/4] locking/rwsem: Enable lockless waiter wakeup(s) Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 09:50 +0200
[PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 09:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 18:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 18:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 21:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rwsem: Drop superfluous waiter refcount Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 21:10 +0200
[PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for rwsem_down_write_failed() Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 07:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for rwsem_down_write_failed() Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com> - 2016-05-09 07:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for rwsem_down_write_failed() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-09 09:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/4] locking/rwsem: Avoid stale ->count for rwsem_down_write_failed() Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-05-09 16:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH -tip 0/4] locking/rwsem (xadd): Reader waiter optimizations Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com> - 2016-05-10 03:40 +0200
csiph-web