Ben LaHaise wrote:
> How about the following instead? Warning: compiled, not tested.
>
> -ben
>
> +/* returns 1 if it successfully obtained the semaphore for write */
> +static inline int down_write_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> +{
> + int old = RW_LOCK_BIAS, new = 0;
> + int res;
> +
> + res = cmpxchg(&sem->count.counter, old, new);
> + return (res == RW_LOCK_BIAS);
> +}
Excellent! This simplifies things greatly. :)
The reason I returned 0 for success and 1 for failure is because that's the
semantic of down_trylock(). IMO they should be consistent.
The only other thing this routine needs is the WAITQUEUE_DEBUG code, at least to
keep the readers and writers fields accurate.
> +
> +/* returns 1 if it successfully obtained the semaphore for read */
> +static inline int down_read_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> +{
> + int ret = 1;
> + asm volatile(
> + LOCK "subl $1,%0
> + js 2f
> + 1:
> + .section .text.lock,\"ax\"
> + 2:" LOCK "inc %0
> + subl %1,%1
> + jmp 1b
> + .previous"
> + :"=m" (*(volatile int *)sem), "=r" (ret) : "1" (ret) : "memory");
> + return ret;
> +}
There's a couple of races I can see here:
1) Task A holds the write lock and the count is at zero. Simultaneously, task B
calls down_read_trylock() and task C calls down_read(). Task B wins and
decrements the count to -1. Not long after, task C decrements it to -2, sees the
carry bit is clear, and calls down_read_failed(). Meanwhile, task B bumps the
count back up to -1 and returns. When task C calls __up_read(), it bumps the
count to zero, sees that the zero flag is set, calls __rwsem_wake(), who sets
the write_bias_granted field to 1.
Now task D comes along. It calls down_write(), which decrements the count to
-BIAS, sees that the zero bit is clear and the carry bit is set, and calls
down_write_failed_biased(). Here it sees that the write_bias_granted field is 1,
xchg's it for a 0, and continues on, blissfully unaware that both A and D hold
the write lock.
2) Task A holds the write lock, and task B is waiting to get the write lock. The
count is at -BIAS. Task C calls down_read_trylock(), who decrements the count to
-BIAS-1. At this moment, task A releases the write lock. It bumps the count to
-1, sees that the carry bit is clear, and continues along. Now task C bumps the
count to 0, and returns. Task B continues sleeping, unaware that the write lock
is available. The next task who tries to grab the lock will decrement the count
below zero. It'll join task B in the biased code where it'll fall into a
never-ending sleep, because no one is going to call __rwsem_wake(). Anyone else
who tries to grab the lock will fall into a similar deep, deep sleep.
Adapting from your down_write_trylock() code, I implemented a new
down_read_trylock() that avoids these races.
Same disclaimer: compiled, not tested.
-Brian
diff -ru4 2.4.1/include/asm-i386/semaphore.h 2.4.1-ben/include/asm-i386/semaphore.h
--- 2.4.1/include/asm-i386/semaphore.h Fri Feb 16 18:47:23 2001
+++ 2.4.1-ben/include/asm-i386/semaphore.h Tue Feb 20 14:23:19 2001
@@ -381,6 +381,61 @@
#endif
__up_write(sem);
}
+/* returns 0 if it successfully obtained the semaphore for write */
+static inline int down_write_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
+{
+ int old = RW_LOCK_BIAS, new = 0;
+
+#if WAITQUEUE_DEBUG
+ if (sem->__magic != (long)&sem->__magic)
+ BUG();
+#endif
+ if (cmpxchg(&sem->count.counter, old, new) == RW_LOCK_BIAS) {
+#if WAITQUEUE_DEBUG
+ if (atomic_read(&sem->writers))
+ BUG();
+ if (atomic_read(&sem->readers))
+ BUG();
+ if (sem->read_bias_granted)
+ BUG();
+ if (sem->write_bias_granted)
+ BUG();
+ atomic_inc(&sem->writers);
+#endif
+ return 0;
+ }
+ else
+ return 1;
+}
+
+/* returns 0 if it successfully obtained the semaphore for read */
+static inline int down_read_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
+{
+ int old, new;
+
+#if WAITQUEUE_DEBUG
+ if (sem->__magic != (long)&sem->__magic)
+ BUG();
+#endif
+repeat:
+ old = atomic_read(&sem->count);
+ if (old <= 0)
+ return 1;
+ new = old - 1;
+ if (cmpxchg(&sem->count.counter, old, new) == old) {
+#if WAITQUEUE_DEBUG
+ if (sem->write_bias_granted)
+ BUG();
+ if (atomic_read(&sem->writers))
+ BUG();
+ atomic_inc(&sem->readers);
+#endif
+ return 0;
+ }
+ else
+ goto repeat;
+}
+
#endif
#endif
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 23 2001 - 21:00:23 EST