lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 5/8] rtmutex: Clean up
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 01:08:13PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > + postunlock = rt_mutex_futex_unlock(&pi_state->pi_mutex, &wake_q);
> >
> > /*
> > * First unlock HB so the waiter does not spin on it once he got woken
> > + * up. Then wakeup the waiter by calling rt_mutex_postunlock(). Priority
> > + * is already adjusted and preemption is disabled to avoid inversion.
> > */
> > spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
> >
> > + if (postunlock)
> > + rt_mutex_postunlock(&wake_q);
>
> I'm most probably missing something, but don't we still need to call
> wake_up_q() even when postunlock is false? IIUC, we were always doing
> that, rt_mutex_postunlock(), before this change (only calling
> preempt_enable() was conditional).

Note that rt_mutex_slowunlock() only uses wake_q on the true path. When
it returns false, it will not have placed a task to wake up.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-06-14 15:21    [W:0.089 / U:0.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site