3.16.36-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carst...@de.ibm.com>
commit 8497695243f70fd19ed6cf28b63584f1b608b5f9 upstream.
arch_spin_lock_wait_flags() checks if a spinlock is not held before
trying a compare and swap instruction. If the lock is unlocked it
tries the compare and swap instruction, however if a different cpu
grabbed the lock in the meantime the instruction will fail as
expected.
Subsequently the arch_spin_lock_wait_flags() incorrectly tries to
figure out if the cpu that holds the lock is running. However it is
using the wrong cpu number for this (-1) and then will also yield the
current cpu to the wrong cpu.
Fix this by adding a missing continue statement.
Fixes: 470ada6b1a1d ("s390/spinlock: refactor arch_spin_lock_wait[_flags]")
Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carst...@de.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidef...@de.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk>
---
arch/s390/lib/spinlock.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
--- a/arch/s390/lib/spinlock.c
+++ b/arch/s390/lib/spinlock.c
@@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait_flags(arch_spin
if (_raw_compare_and_swap(&lp->lock, 0, cpu))
return;
local_irq_restore(flags);
+ continue;
}
/* Check if the lock owner is running. */
if (!smp_vcpu_scheduled(~owner)) {
