Re: [RFC 1/3] mutex: In mutex_can_spin_on_owner(), return false iftask need_resched()

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 04:33:08PM -0800, Jason Low wrote:
> The mutex_can_spin_on_owner() function should also return false if the
> task needs to be rescheduled.
> 

While I was staring at mutex_can_spin_on_owner(); don't we need this?

 kernel/locking/mutex.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index 4dd6e4c219de..480d2f437964 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -214,8 +214,10 @@ static inline int mutex_can_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock)
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	owner = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->owner);
-	if (owner)
+	if (owner) {
+		smp_read_barrier_depends();
 		retval = owner->on_cpu;
+	}
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 	/*
 	 * if lock->owner is not set, the mutex owner may have just acquired
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/