On 06/30/2017 02:01 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
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
exit_sem() with spin_lock() followed immediately by spin_unlock().
This should be safe from a performance perspective because exit_sem()
is rarely invoked in production.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]>
Cc: Manfred Spraul <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: Alan Stern <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrea Parri <[email protected]>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Manfred Spraul <[email protected]>
---
ipc/sem.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c
index 947dc2348271..e88d0749a929 100644
--- a/ipc/sem.c
+++ b/ipc/sem.c
@@ -2096,7 +2096,8 @@ void exit_sem(struct task_struct *tsk)
* possibility where we exit while freeary() didn't
* finish unlocking sem_undo_list.
*/
- spin_unlock_wait(&ulp->lock);
+ spin_lock(&ulp->lock);
+ spin_unlock(&ulp->lock);
rcu_read_unlock();
break;
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
