From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, juri.lelli@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
xlpang@redhat.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
jdesfossez@efficios.com, bristot@redhat.com,
dvhart@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5 12/14] futex,rt_mutex: Restructure rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock()
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 15:18:46 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703071516080.3584@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170304093559.546712677@infradead.org>
On Sat, 4 Mar 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> +/**
> + * rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock() - Cleanup failed lock acquisition
> + * @lock: the rt_mutex we were woken on
> + * @waiter: the pre-initialized rt_mutex_waiter
> + *
> + * Clean up the failed lock acquisition as per rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock().
> + *
> + * Returns:
> + * true - did the cleanup, we done.
> + * false - we acquired the lock after rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock() returned,
> + * caller should disregards its return value.
Hmm. How would that happen? Magic owner assignement to a non waiter? The
callsite only calls here in the failed case.
I must be missing something
Thanks,
tglx
> + *
> + * Special API call for PI-futex support
> + */
> +bool rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
> + struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
> +{
> + bool cleanup = false;
> +
> + raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
> + /*
> + * If we acquired the lock, no cleanup required.
> + */
> + if (rt_mutex_owner(lock) != current) {
> + remove_waiter(lock, waiter);
> + fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(lock);
> + cleanup = true;
> + }
> + raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
> +
> + return cleanup;
> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-07 14:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-04 9:27 [PATCH -v5 00/14] the saga of FUTEX_UNLOCK_PI wobbles continues Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 01/14] futex: Fix potential use-after-free in FUTEX_REQUEUE_PI Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 20:48 ` [tip:locking/urgent] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 02/14] futex: Add missing error handling to FUTEX_REQUEUE_PI Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-14 20:49 ` [tip:locking/urgent] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 03/14] futex: Cleanup variable names for futex_top_waiter() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 04/14] futex: Use smp_store_release() in mark_wake_futex() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 05/14] futex: Remove rt_mutex_deadlock_account_*() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 06/14] futex,rt_mutex: Provide futex specific rt_mutex API Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 07/14] futex: Change locking rules Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 13:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-07 16:47 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-03-07 18:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 08/14] futex: Cleanup refcounting Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 09/14] futex: Rework inconsistent rt_mutex/futex_q state Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 13:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 10/14] futex: Pull rt_mutex_futex_unlock() out from under hb->lock Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 14:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-07 18:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 11/14] futex,rt_mutex: Introduce rt_mutex_init_waiter() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 12/14] futex,rt_mutex: Restructure rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 14:18 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2017-03-07 17:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 17:59 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-08 15:29 ` [PATCH] futex: move debug_rt_mutex_free_waiter() further down Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-03-08 15:37 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-03-08 16:21 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-08 16:20 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-13 9:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 13/14] futex: Rework futex_lock_pi() to use rt_mutex_*_proxy_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-04 9:27 ` [PATCH -v5 14/14] futex: futex_unlock_pi() determinism Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-07 14:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-07 17:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-13 9:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-13 14:25 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-13 15:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.20.1703071516080.3584@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=jdesfossez@efficios.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=xlpang@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox