diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c index 50bc93b3552f..39c9f8075e14 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c +++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c @@ -533,76 +533,119 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(struct task_struct *task, * * Must be called with lock->wait_lock held. * - * @lock: the lock to be acquired. - * @task: the task which wants to acquire the lock - * @waiter: the waiter that is queued to the lock's wait list. (could be NULL) + * @lock: The lock to be acquired. + * @task: The task which wants to acquire the lock + * @waiter: The waiter that is queued to the lock's wait list if the + * callsite called task_blocked_on_lock(), otherwise NULL */ static int try_to_take_rt_mutex(struct rt_mutex *lock, struct task_struct *task, - struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter) + struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter) { + unsigned long flags; + /* - * We have to be careful here if the atomic speedups are - * enabled, such that, when - * - no other waiter is on the lock - * - the lock has been released since we did the cmpxchg - * the lock can be released or taken while we are doing the - * checks and marking the lock with RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS. + * Before testing whether we can acquire @lock, we set the + * RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS bit in @lock->owner. This forces all + * other tasks which try to modify @lock into the slow path + * and they serialize on @lock->wait_lock. * - * The atomic acquire/release aware variant of - * mark_rt_mutex_waiters uses a cmpxchg loop. After setting - * the WAITERS bit, the atomic release / acquire can not - * happen anymore and lock->wait_lock protects us from the - * non-atomic case. + * The RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS bit can have a transitional state + * as explained at the top of this file if and only if: * - * Note, that this might set lock->owner = - * RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS in the case the lock is not contended - * any more. This is fixed up when we take the ownership. - * This is the transitional state explained at the top of this file. + * - There is a lock owner. The caller must fixup the + * transient state if it does a trylock or leaves the lock + * function due to a signal or timeout. + * + * - @task acquires the lock and there are no other + * waiters. This is undone in rt_mutex_set_owner(@task) at + * the end of this function. */ mark_rt_mutex_waiters(lock); + /* + * If @lock has an owner, give up. + */ if (rt_mutex_owner(lock)) return 0; /* - * It will get the lock because of one of these conditions: - * 1) there is no waiter - * 2) higher priority than waiters - * 3) it is top waiter + * If @waiter != NULL, @task has already enqueued the waiter + * into @lock waiter list. If @waiter == NULL then this is a + * trylock attempt. */ - if (rt_mutex_has_waiters(lock)) { - if (task->prio >= rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)->prio) { - if (!waiter || waiter != rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)) - return 0; - } - } - - if (waiter || rt_mutex_has_waiters(lock)) { - unsigned long flags; - struct rt_mutex_waiter *top; - - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&task->pi_lock, flags); - - /* remove the queued waiter. */ - if (waiter) { - rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter); - task->pi_blocked_on = NULL; - } + if (waiter) { + /* + * If waiter is not the highest priority waiter of + * @lock, give up. + */ + if (waiter != rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)) + return 0; /* - * We have to enqueue the top waiter(if it exists) into - * task->pi_waiters list. + * We can acquire the lock. Remove the waiter from the + * lock waiters list. + */ + rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter); + + } else { + /* + * If the lock has waiters already we check whether @task is + * eligible to take over the lock. + * + * If there are no other waiters, @task can acquire + * the lock. @task->pi_blocked_on is NULL, so it does + * not need to be dequeued. */ if (rt_mutex_has_waiters(lock)) { - top = rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock); - rt_mutex_enqueue_pi(task, top); + /* + * If @task->prio is greater than or equal to + * the top waiter priority (kernel view), + * @task lost. + */ + if (task->prio >= rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)->prio) + return 0; + + /* + * The current top waiter stays enqueued. We + * don't have to change anything in the lock + * waiters order. + */ + } else { + /* + * No waiters. Take the lock without the + * pi_lock dance.@task->pi_blocked_on is NULL + * and we have no waiters to enqueue in @task + * pi waiters list. + */ + goto takeit; } - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task->pi_lock, flags); } + /* + * Clear @task->pi_blocked_on. Requires protection by + * @task->pi_lock. Redundant operation for the @waiter == NULL + * case, but conditionals are more expensive than a redundant + * store. + */ + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&task->pi_lock, flags); + task->pi_blocked_on = NULL; + /* + * Finish the lock acquisition. @task is the new owner. If + * other waiters exist we have to insert the highest priority + * waiter into @task->pi_waiters list. + */ + if (rt_mutex_has_waiters(lock)) + rt_mutex_enqueue_pi(task, rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)); + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task->pi_lock, flags); + +takeit: /* We got the lock. */ debug_rt_mutex_lock(lock); + /* + * This either preserves the RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS bit if there + * are still waiters or clears it. + */ rt_mutex_set_owner(lock, task); rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock(lock, task);