Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_write_failed

[Rik van Riel]

On 03/15/2013 06:54 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> When waking writers, we never grant them the lock - instead, they have
> to acquire it themselves when they run, and remove themselves from the
> wait_list when they succeed.
>
> As a result, we can do a few simplifications in rwsem_down_write_failed():
>
> - We don't need to check for !waiter.task since __rwsem_do_wake() doesn't
>    remove writers from the wait_list
>
> - There is no point releaseing the wait_lock before entering the wait loop,
>    as we will need to reacquire it immediately. We can change the loop so
>    that the lock is always held at the start of each loop iteration.
>
> - We don't need to get a reference on the task structure, since the task
>    is responsible for removing itself from the wait_list. There is no risk,
>    like in the rwsem_down_read_failed() case, that a task would wake up and
>    exit (thus destroying its task structure) while __rwsem_do_wake() is
>    still running - wait_lock protects against that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>

--
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/