|
Revision tags: v6.15, v6.15-rc7, v6.15-rc6, v6.15-rc5, v6.15-rc4, v6.15-rc3, v6.15-rc2, v6.15-rc1, v6.14, v6.14-rc7, v6.14-rc6, v6.14-rc5, v6.14-rc4, v6.14-rc3, v6.14-rc2, v6.14-rc1, v6.13, v6.13-rc7, v6.13-rc6, v6.13-rc5, v6.13-rc4, v6.13-rc3, v6.13-rc2, v6.13-rc1, v6.12, v6.12-rc7, v6.12-rc6, v6.12-rc5, v6.12-rc4, v6.12-rc3, v6.12-rc2, v6.12-rc1, v6.11, v6.11-rc7, v6.11-rc6, v6.11-rc5, v6.11-rc4, v6.11-rc3, v6.11-rc2, v6.11-rc1, v6.10, v6.10-rc7, v6.10-rc6, v6.10-rc5, v6.10-rc4, v6.10-rc3, v6.10-rc2, v6.10-rc1, v6.9, v6.9-rc7, v6.9-rc6, v6.9-rc5, v6.9-rc4, v6.9-rc3, v6.9-rc2, v6.9-rc1 |
|
| #
fa1f5116 |
| 19-Mar-2024 |
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]> |
locking: Make rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep() build with PREEMPT_RT=y
The commit cited below broke the build for PREEMPT_RT because
rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep() passes a struct rw_semapho
locking: Make rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep() build with PREEMPT_RT=y
The commit cited below broke the build for PREEMPT_RT because
rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep() passes a struct rw_semaphore but
rw_base_assert_held_write() expects struct rwbase_rt. Fixing the type alone
leads to the problem that WARN_ON() is not found because bug.h is missing.
In order to resolve this:
- Keep the assert (WARN_ON()) in rwsem.h (not rwbase_rt.h)
- Make rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep() do the implementation
specific (rw_base) writer check.
- Replace the "inline" with __always_inline which was used before.
Fixes: f70405afc99b1 ("locking: Add rwsem_assert_held() and rwsem_assert_held_write()")
Reported-by: Clark Williams <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
show more ...
|
|
Revision tags: v6.8, v6.8-rc7, v6.8-rc6 |
|
| #
f70405af |
| 19-Feb-2024 |
Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <[email protected]> |
locking: Add rwsem_assert_held() and rwsem_assert_held_write()
Modelled after lockdep_assert_held() and lockdep_assert_held_write(),
but are always active, even when lockdep is disabled. Of course,
locking: Add rwsem_assert_held() and rwsem_assert_held_write()
Modelled after lockdep_assert_held() and lockdep_assert_held_write(),
but are always active, even when lockdep is disabled. Of course, they
don't test that _this_ thread is the owner, but it's sufficient to catch
many bugs and doesn't incur the same performance penalty as lockdep.
Acked-by: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
Acked-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <[email protected]>
show more ...
|
|
Revision tags: v6.8-rc5, v6.8-rc4, v6.8-rc3, v6.8-rc2, v6.8-rc1, v6.7, v6.7-rc8, v6.7-rc7, v6.7-rc6, v6.7-rc5, v6.7-rc4, v6.7-rc3, v6.7-rc2, v6.7-rc1, v6.6, v6.6-rc7, v6.6-rc6, v6.6-rc5, v6.6-rc4, v6.6-rc3, v6.6-rc2, v6.6-rc1, v6.5, v6.5-rc7, v6.5-rc6, v6.5-rc5, v6.5-rc4, v6.5-rc3, v6.5-rc2, v6.5-rc1, v6.4, v6.4-rc7, v6.4-rc6, v6.4-rc5, v6.4-rc4, v6.4-rc3, v6.4-rc2, v6.4-rc1, v6.3, v6.3-rc7, v6.3-rc6, v6.3-rc5, v6.3-rc4, v6.3-rc3, v6.3-rc2, v6.3-rc1, v6.2, v6.2-rc8, v6.2-rc7, v6.2-rc6, v6.2-rc5, v6.2-rc4, v6.2-rc3, v6.2-rc2, v6.2-rc1, v6.1, v6.1-rc8, v6.1-rc7, v6.1-rc6, v6.1-rc5, v6.1-rc4, v6.1-rc3, v6.1-rc2, v6.1-rc1, v6.0, v6.0-rc7, v6.0-rc6, v6.0-rc5, v6.0-rc4, v6.0-rc3, v6.0-rc2, v6.0-rc1, v5.19, v5.19-rc8, v5.19-rc7, v5.19-rc6, v5.19-rc5, v5.19-rc4, v5.19-rc3, v5.19-rc2, v5.19-rc1, v5.18, v5.18-rc7, v5.18-rc6, v5.18-rc5, v5.18-rc4, v5.18-rc3, v5.18-rc2, v5.18-rc1, v5.17, v5.17-rc8, v5.17-rc7, v5.17-rc6, v5.17-rc5, v5.17-rc4, v5.17-rc3, v5.17-rc2, v5.17-rc1, v5.16, v5.16-rc8, v5.16-rc7, v5.16-rc6, v5.16-rc5, v5.16-rc4, v5.16-rc3, v5.16-rc2, v5.16-rc1, v5.15, v5.15-rc7, v5.15-rc6, v5.15-rc5, v5.15-rc4, v5.15-rc3, v5.15-rc2, v5.15-rc1, v5.14, v5.14-rc7, v5.14-rc6 |
|
| #
943f0edb |
| 15-Aug-2021 |
Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> |
locking/rt: Add base code for RT rw_semaphore and rwlock
On PREEMPT_RT, rw_semaphores and rwlocks are substituted with an rtmutex and
a reader count. The implementation is writer unfair, as it is no
locking/rt: Add base code for RT rw_semaphore and rwlock
On PREEMPT_RT, rw_semaphores and rwlocks are substituted with an rtmutex and
a reader count. The implementation is writer unfair, as it is not feasible
to do priority inheritance on multiple readers, but experience has shown
that real-time workloads are not the typical workloads which are sensitive
to writer starvation.
The inner workings of rw_semaphores and rwlocks on RT are almost identical
except for the task state and signal handling. rw_semaphores are not state
preserving over a contention, they are expected to enter and leave with state
== TASK_RUNNING. rwlocks have a mechanism to preserve the state of the task
at entry and restore it after unblocking taking potential non-lock related
wakeups into account. rw_semaphores can also be subject to signal handling
interrupting a blocked state, while rwlocks ignore signals.
To avoid code duplication, provide a shared implementation which takes the
small difference vs. state and signals into account. The code is included
into the relevant rw_semaphore/rwlock base code and compiled for each use
case separately.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
show more ...
|