There is no agreed-upon definition of spin_unlock_wait()'s semantics, and it appears that all callers could do just as well with a lock/unlock pair. This commit therefore replaces the spin_unlock_wait() call in completion_done() with spin_lock() followed immediately by spin_unlock(). This should be safe from a performance perspective because the lock will be held only the wakeup happens really quickly.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]> Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]> Cc: Alan Stern <[email protected]> Cc: Andrea Parri <[email protected]> Cc: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> [ paulmck: Updated to use irqsave based on 0day Test Robot feedback. ] diff --git a/kernel/sched/completion.c b/kernel/sched/completion.c index 13fc5ae9bf2f..c9524d2d9316 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/completion.c +++ b/kernel/sched/completion.c @@ -300,6 +300,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(try_wait_for_completion); */ bool completion_done(struct completion *x) { + unsigned long flags; + if (!READ_ONCE(x->done)) return false; @@ -307,14 +309,9 @@ bool completion_done(struct completion *x) * If ->done, we need to wait for complete() to release ->wait.lock * otherwise we can end up freeing the completion before complete() * is done referencing it. - * - * The RMB pairs with complete()'s RELEASE of ->wait.lock and orders - * the loads of ->done and ->wait.lock such that we cannot observe - * the lock before complete() acquires it while observing the ->done - * after it's acquired the lock. */ - smp_rmb(); - spin_unlock_wait(&x->wait.lock); + spin_lock_irqsave(&x->wait.lock, flags); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&x->wait.lock, flags); return true; } EXPORT_SYMBOL(completion_done);
