mutex: Fix/document access-once assumption in mutex_can_spin_on_owner()

mutex_can_spin_on_owner() is technically broken in that it would
in theory allow the compiler to load lock->owner twice, seeing a
pointer first time and a NULL pointer the second time.

Linus pointed out that a compiler has to be seriously broken to
not compile this correctly - but nevertheless this change
is correct as it will better document the implementation.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: NDavidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Acked-by: NWaiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>
Acked-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Acked-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: NRik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20130719183101.GA20909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.netSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

kernel/mutex.c

@@ -209,11 +209,13 @@ int mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct task_struct *owner)
  */
 static inline int mutex_can_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock)
 {
+	struct task_struct *owner;
 	int retval = 1;
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
-	if (lock->owner)
-		retval = lock->owner->on_cpu;
+	owner = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->owner);
+	if (owner)
+		retval = owner->on_cpu;
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 	/*
 	 * if lock->owner is not set, the mutex owner may have just acquired