提交 78bff1c8 编写于 作者: O Oleg Nesterov 提交者: Ingo Molnar

x86/ticketlock: Fix spin_unlock_wait() livelock

arch_spin_unlock_wait() looks very suboptimal, to the point I
think this is just wrong and can lead to livelock: if the lock
is heavily contended we can never see head == tail.

But we do not need to wait for arch_spin_is_locked() == F. If it
is locked we only need to wait until the current owner drops
this lock. So we could simply spin until old_head !=
lock->tickets.head in this case, but .head can overflow and thus
we can't check "unlocked" only once before the main loop.

Also, the "unlocked" check can ignore TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG bit.
Signed-off-by: NOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Acked-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Paul E.McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20141201213417.GA5842@redhat.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
上级 9fd7fc34
......@@ -184,8 +184,20 @@ static __always_inline void arch_spin_lock_flags(arch_spinlock_t *lock,
static inline void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
while (arch_spin_is_locked(lock))
__ticket_t head = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets.head);
for (;;) {
struct __raw_tickets tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
/*
* We need to check "unlocked" in a loop, tmp.head == head
* can be false positive because of overflow.
*/
if (tmp.head == (tmp.tail & ~TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG) ||
tmp.head != head)
break;
cpu_relax();
}
}
/*
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册