mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: tglx@linutronix.de
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, juri.lelli@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	xlpang@redhat.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
	jdesfossez@efficios.com, bristot@redhat.com,
	dvhart@infradead.org, peterz@infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH -v6 10/13] futex,rt_mutex: Restructure rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock()
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:35:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170322104152.001659630@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170322103547.756091212@infradead.org>

[-- Attachment #1: peterz-futex-pi-unlock-9.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 5049 bytes --]

With the ultimate goal of keeping rt_mutex wait_list and futex_q
waiters consistent we want to split 'rt_mutex_futex_lock()' into finer
parts, such that only the actual blocking can be done without hb->lock
held.

This means we need to split rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock() into two
parts, one that does the blocking and one that does remove_waiter()
when we fail to acquire.

When we do acquire, we can safely remove ourselves, since there is no
concurrency on the lock owner.

This means that, except for futex_lock_pi(), all wait_list
modifications are done with both hb->lock and wait_lock held.

[bigeasy@linutronix.de: fix for futex_requeue_pi_signal_restart]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
 kernel/futex.c                  |    7 +++--
 kernel/locking/rtmutex.c        |   53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h |    8 +++---
 3 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/futex.c
+++ b/kernel/futex.c
@@ -3032,10 +3032,13 @@ static int futex_wait_requeue_pi(u32 __u
 		 */
 		WARN_ON(!q.pi_state);
 		pi_mutex = &q.pi_state->pi_mutex;
-		ret = rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock(pi_mutex, to, &rt_waiter);
-		debug_rt_mutex_free_waiter(&rt_waiter);
+		ret = rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock(pi_mutex, to, &rt_waiter);
 
 		spin_lock(q.lock_ptr);
+		if (ret && !rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock(pi_mutex, &rt_waiter))
+			ret = 0;
+
+		debug_rt_mutex_free_waiter(&rt_waiter);
 		/*
 		 * Fixup the pi_state owner and possibly acquire the lock if we
 		 * haven't already.
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1753,21 +1753,23 @@ struct task_struct *rt_mutex_next_owner(
 }
 
 /**
- * rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock() - Complete lock acquisition
+ * rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock() - Wait for lock acquisition
  * @lock:		the rt_mutex we were woken on
  * @to:			the timeout, null if none. hrtimer should already have
  *			been started.
  * @waiter:		the pre-initialized rt_mutex_waiter
  *
- * Complete the lock acquisition started our behalf by another thread.
+ * Wait for the the lock acquisition started on our behalf by
+ * rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock(). Upon failure, the caller must call
+ * rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock().
  *
  * Returns:
  *  0 - success
  * <0 - error, one of -EINTR, -ETIMEDOUT
  *
- * Special API call for PI-futex requeue support
+ * Special API call for PI-futex support
  */
-int rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
+int rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
 			       struct hrtimer_sleeper *to,
 			       struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
 {
@@ -1780,9 +1782,6 @@ int rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock(struct rt
 	/* sleep on the mutex */
 	ret = __rt_mutex_slowlock(lock, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, to, waiter);
 
-	if (unlikely(ret))
-		remove_waiter(lock, waiter);
-
 	/*
 	 * try_to_take_rt_mutex() sets the waiter bit unconditionally. We might
 	 * have to fix that up.
@@ -1793,3 +1792,43 @@ int rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock(struct rt
 
 	return ret;
 }
+
+/**
+ * rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock() - Cleanup failed lock acquisition
+ * @lock:		the rt_mutex we were woken on
+ * @waiter:		the pre-initialized rt_mutex_waiter
+ *
+ * Attempt to clean up after a failed rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock().
+ *
+ * Unless we acquired the lock; we're still enqueued on the wait-list and can
+ * in fact still be granted ownership until we're removed. Therefore we can
+ * find we are in fact the owner and must disregard the
+ * rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock() failure.
+ *
+ * Returns:
+ *  true  - did the cleanup, we done.
+ *  false - we acquired the lock after rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock() returned,
+ *          caller should disregards its return value.
+ *
+ * Special API call for PI-futex support
+ */
+bool rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
+				 struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
+{
+	bool cleanup = false;
+
+	raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
+	/*
+	 * Unless we're the owner; we're still enqueued on the wait_list.
+	 * So check if we became owner, if not, take us off the wait_list.
+	 */
+	if (rt_mutex_owner(lock) != current) {
+		remove_waiter(lock, waiter);
+		fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(lock);
+		cleanup = true;
+	}
+	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
+
+	return cleanup;
+}
+
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h
@@ -107,9 +107,11 @@ extern void rt_mutex_init_waiter(struct
 extern int rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
 				     struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
 				     struct task_struct *task);
-extern int rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
-				      struct hrtimer_sleeper *to,
-				      struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter);
+extern int rt_mutex_wait_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
+			       struct hrtimer_sleeper *to,
+			       struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter);
+extern bool rt_mutex_cleanup_proxy_lock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
+				 struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter);
 
 extern int rt_mutex_timed_futex_lock(struct rt_mutex *l, struct hrtimer_sleeper *to);
 extern int rt_mutex_futex_trylock(struct rt_mutex *l);

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-03-22 10:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-22 10:35 [PATCH -v6 00/13] The arduous story of FUTEX_UNLOCK_PI Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 01/13] futex: Cleanup variable names for futex_top_waiter() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:19   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-24 21:11   ` [PATCH -v6 01/13] " Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 02/13] futex: Use smp_store_release() in mark_wake_futex() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:19   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-24 21:16   ` [PATCH -v6 02/13] " Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 03/13] futex: Remove rt_mutex_deadlock_account_*() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:20   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-24 21:29   ` [PATCH -v6 03/13] " Darren Hart
2017-03-24 21:31     ` Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 04/13] futex,rt_mutex: Provide futex specific rt_mutex API Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:20   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-25  0:37   ` [PATCH -v6 04/13] " Darren Hart
2017-04-06 12:15     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-06 17:02       ` Darren Hart
2017-04-05 15:02   ` Darren Hart
2017-04-06 12:17     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-06 17:08       ` Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 05/13] futex: Change locking rules Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:21   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-05 21:18   ` [PATCH -v6 05/13] " Darren Hart
2017-04-06 12:28     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-06 15:58       ` Joe Perches
2017-04-06 17:21       ` Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 06/13] futex: Cleanup refcounting Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:21   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-05 21:29   ` [PATCH -v6 06/13] " Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 07/13] futex: Rework inconsistent rt_mutex/futex_q state Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:22   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-05 21:58   ` [PATCH -v6 07/13] " Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 08/13] futex: Pull rt_mutex_futex_unlock() out from under hb->lock Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:22   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-05 23:52   ` [PATCH -v6 08/13] " Darren Hart
2017-04-06 12:42     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-06 17:42       ` Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 09/13] futex,rt_mutex: Introduce rt_mutex_init_waiter() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:23   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-05 23:57   ` [PATCH -v6 09/13] " Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-03-23 18:23   ` [tip:locking/core] futex,rt_mutex: Restructure rt_mutex_finish_proxy_lock() tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-07 23:30   ` [PATCH -v6 10/13] " Darren Hart
2017-04-07 23:35     ` Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 11/13] futex: Rework futex_lock_pi() to use rt_mutex_*_proxy_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:24   ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-08  0:55   ` [PATCH -v6 11/13] " Darren Hart
2017-04-10 15:51   ` alexander.levin
2017-04-10 16:03     ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-04-14  9:30       ` [tip:locking/core] futex: Avoid freeing an active timer tip-bot for Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-22 10:35 ` [PATCH -v6 12/13] futex: futex_unlock_pi() determinism Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:24   ` [tip:locking/core] futex: Futex_unlock_pi() determinism tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-08  1:27   ` [PATCH -v6 12/13] futex: futex_unlock_pi() determinism Darren Hart
2017-03-22 10:36 ` [PATCH -v6 13/13] futex: futex_lock_pi() vs PREEMPT_RT_FULL Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23 18:25   ` [tip:locking/core] futex: Drop hb->lock before enqueueing on the rtmutex tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-08  2:26   ` [PATCH -v6 13/13] futex: futex_lock_pi() vs PREEMPT_RT_FULL Darren Hart
2017-04-08  5:22     ` Mike Galbraith
2017-04-10  8:43     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-04-10  9:08     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-10 16:05       ` Darren Hart
2017-03-24  1:45 ` [PATCH -v6 00/13] The arduous story of FUTEX_UNLOCK_PI Darren Hart

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170322104152.001659630@infradead.org \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
    --cc=jdesfossez@efficios.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=xlpang@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome