lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] atomic: Only take lock when the counter drops to zero on UP as well
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 01:32:54PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> Am 11.04.2009 um 19:49 schrieb "Paul E. McKenney"
> <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 06:13:57PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
>>> I think it is wrong to unconditionally take the lock before calling
>>> atomic_dec_and_test() in _atomic_dec_and_lock(). This will deadlock in
>>> situation where it is known that the counter will not reach zero (e.g.
>>> holding
>>> another reference to the same object) but the lock is already taken.
>>
>> The thought of calling _atomic_dec_and_lock() when you already hold the
>> lock really really scares me.
>>
>> Could you please give an example where you need to do this?
>>
>
> There is a part of the union mount patches that needs to do a union_put()
> (which itself includes a path_put() that uses atomic_dec_and_lock() in
> mntput() ). Since it is changing the namespace I need to hold the vfsmount
> lock. I know that the mnt's count > 1 since it is a parent of the mnt I'm
> changing in the mount tree. I could possibly delay the union_put().
>
> In general this let's atomic_dec_and_lock() behave similar on SMP and UP.
> Remember that this already works with CONFIG_SMP as before Nick's patch.

I asked, I guess. ;-)

There is some sort of common code path, so that you cannot simply call
atomic_dec() when holding the lock?

Thanx, Paul
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@suse.de>
>>> ---
>>> lib/dec_and_lock.c | 3 +--
>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/dec_and_lock.c b/lib/dec_and_lock.c
>>> index a65c314..e73822a 100644
>>> --- a/lib/dec_and_lock.c
>>> +++ b/lib/dec_and_lock.c
>>> @@ -19,11 +19,10 @@
>>> */
>>> int _atomic_dec_and_lock(atomic_t *atomic, spinlock_t *lock)
>>> {
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>>> /* Subtract 1 from counter unless that drops it to 0 (ie. it was 1) */
>>> if (atomic_add_unless(atomic, -1, 1))
>>> return 0;
>>> -#endif
>>> +
>>> /* Otherwise do it the slow way */
>>> spin_lock(lock);
>>> if (atomic_dec_and_test(atomic))
>>> --
>>> 1.6.0.2
>>>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-13 08:05    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site