locking/mutex: Don't assume TASK_RUNNING
We're going to make might_sleep() test for TASK_RUNNING, because blocking without TASK_RUNNING will destroy the task state by setting it to TASK_RUNNING. There are a few occasions where its 'valid' to call blocking primitives (and mutex_lock in particular) and not have TASK_RUNNING, typically such cases are right before we set TASK_RUNNING anyhow. Robustify the code by not assuming this; this has the beneficial side effect of allowing optional code emission for fixing the above might_sleep() false positives. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: tglx@linutronix.de Cc: ilya.dryomov@inktank.com Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140924082241.988560063@infradead.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
f4e9d94a5b
commit
6f942a1f26
|
@ -378,8 +378,14 @@ done:
|
||||||
* reschedule now, before we try-lock the mutex. This avoids getting
|
* reschedule now, before we try-lock the mutex. This avoids getting
|
||||||
* scheduled out right after we obtained the mutex.
|
* scheduled out right after we obtained the mutex.
|
||||||
*/
|
*/
|
||||||
if (need_resched())
|
if (need_resched()) {
|
||||||
|
/*
|
||||||
|
* We _should_ have TASK_RUNNING here, but just in case
|
||||||
|
* we do not, make it so, otherwise we might get stuck.
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
|
||||||
schedule_preempt_disabled();
|
schedule_preempt_disabled();
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
return false;
|
return false;
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue