Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/wait: avoid abort_exclusive_wait() in __wait_on_bit_lock()

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

On 09/01, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > 	ret = 0;
> >
> > 	for (;;) {
> > 		prepare_to_wait_exclusive(wq, &q->wait, mode);
> >
> > 		if (test_bit(&q->key.bit_nr, &q->key.flag))
> > 			ret = action(&q->key, mode);
> >
> > 		if (!test_and_set_bit(&q->key.bit_nr, &q->key.flag)) {
> > 			/* we got the lock anyway, ignore the signal */
> > 			ret = 0;
> > 			break;
> > 		}
> >
> > 		if (ret)
> > 			break;
> > 	}
> > 	finish_wait(wq, &q->wait);
> >
> > 	return ret;
> >
> >
> > Would not that work too?
>
> Nope, because we need to do that finish_wait() before
> test_and_set_bit()..

Yes, I meant

	int __sched
	__wait_on_bit_lock(wait_queue_head_t *wq, struct wait_bit_queue *q,
				wait_bit_action_f *action, unsigned mode)
	{
		int ret = 0;

		for (;;) {
			prepare_to_wait_exclusive(wq, &q->wait, mode);
			if (test_bit(q->key.bit_nr, q->key.flags))
				ret = action(&q->key, mode);

			finish_wait(wq, &q->wait);

			if (!test_and_set_bit(q->key.bit_nr, q->key.flags))
				return 0;
			else if (ret)
				return ret;

		}
	}

> Also the problem with doing finish_wait() unconditionally would be
> destroying the FIFO order. With a bit of bad luck you'd get starvation
> cases :/

OK, I didn't think about that, thanks.

Oleg.