On 09/02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> FWIW, the way the mutex code avoids this issue is by doing the
> signal_pending test while holding the q->lock, that way its exclusive
> with wakeup.
And __wait_event_interruptible_locked() too.
BTW it is buggy anyway, it needs the
- __add_wait_queue_tail(&(wq), &__wait);
+ if (exclusive)
+ __add_wait_queue_tail(&(wq), &__wait);
+ else
+ __add_wait_queue((&(wq), &__wait);
and in fact it should use __add_wait_queue_exclusive() so that we
can remove another "if (exclusive)" but this is off-topic.
Yes, I considered this option, but to me the addtional finish_wait()
looks simpler.
And, if you agree with this change I will try to change __wait_event()
as well and kill abort_exclusive_wait().
And in this case we certainly do not want to check the "condition" with
q->lock held, because this would mean that "condition" won't be able to
take this lock.
Oleg.
