From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" <ljs@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/rwsem: don't let a read lock steal from a queued writer
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2026 23:55:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98a82cda-e363-449e-9b2b-8432f8fdcc3a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261105-rwsem-dont-steal-from-queued-writer-v1-1-275e070f426f@kernel.org>
On 11/5/26 3:24 PM, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote:
> Since commit 1a728dff855a ("locking/rwsem: Enable reader optimistic lock
> stealing"), a racing read lock can steal an rwsem from under a queued
> writer whose handoff timeout hasn't expired yet.
>
> This is most problematic when an rwsem read lock is released then
> reacquired in order to relieve lock contention, as instead it will simply
> have the lock handed right back to it ahead of the intended beneficiary.
>
> Naturally, this behaviour rather defeats the object of doing this kind of
> thing, so this is less than ideal.
If there is only one reader doing this release and then acquire
operation, it will leave its task_struct value in the owner field. So we
can check if the owner field to determine if we should skip the lock
stealing operation.
Something like
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
index b9c180ac1eee..1f0fffd75c18 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
@@ -1019,15 +1019,17 @@ rwsem_down_read_slowpath(struct rw_semaphore
*sem, long count, unsigned int stat
long adjustment = -RWSEM_READER_BIAS;
long rcnt = (count >> RWSEM_READER_SHIFT);
struct rwsem_waiter waiter, *first;
+ long owner = atomic_long_read(&sem->owner);
DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
/*
* To prevent a constant stream of readers from starving a sleeping
* writer, don't attempt optimistic lock stealing if the lock is
- * very likely owned by readers.
+ * very likely owned by readers or when the current task is the
+ * previous owning reader.
*/
- if ((atomic_long_read(&sem->owner) & RWSEM_READER_OWNED) &&
- (rcnt > 1) && !(count & RWSEM_WRITER_LOCKED))
+ if ((owner & RWSEM_READER_OWNED) && ((rcnt > 1) ||
+ (current == (struct task_struct *)(owner &
~RWSEM_OWNER_FLAGS_MASK))))
goto queue;
/*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will this help?
Cheers,
Longman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-06 4:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-05 20:24 Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-11-06 4:55 ` Waiman Long [this message]
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=98a82cda-e363-449e-9b2b-8432f8fdcc3a@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®