Re: Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch

From: Paul Mackerras
Date: Mon Jan 17 2005 - 02:52:28 EST


Chris Wedgwood writes:

> +#define rwlock_is_write_locked(x) ((x)->lock == 0)

AFAICS on i386 the lock word, although it goes to 0 when write-locked,
can then go negative temporarily when another cpu tries to get a read
or write lock. So I think this should be

((signed int)(x)->lock <= 0)

(or the equivalent using atomic_read).

Paul.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/