Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 9 Jun 2014 16:59:43 -0400 | From | Steven Rostedt <> | Subject | Re: [patch V3 1/7] rtmutex: Deobfuscate chain walk |
| |
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 20:28:06 -0000 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> There is no point to keep the task ref across the check for lock > owner. Drop the ref before that, so the protection context is clear. > > Found while documenting the chain walk.
This looks fine, I just hate the subject. I don't see how it is 'deobfuscating" the chain walk. How about:
rtmutex: No need to keep task ref when checking lock ownership
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
-- Steve
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > --- > kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > Index: tip/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c > =================================================================== > --- tip.orig/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c > +++ tip/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c > @@ -411,6 +411,8 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(st > > /* Release the task */ > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task->pi_lock, flags); > + put_task_struct(task); > + > if (!rt_mutex_owner(lock)) { > /* > * If the requeue above changed the top waiter, then we need > @@ -420,9 +422,8 @@ static int rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(st > if (top_waiter != rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)) > wake_up_process(rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)->task); > raw_spin_unlock(&lock->wait_lock); > - goto out_put_task; > + return 0; > } > - put_task_struct(task); > > /* Grab the next task */ > task = rt_mutex_owner(lock); >
| |