While this prior commit:
54cf809b95 ("locking,qspinlock: Fix spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait()")
... fixes spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait() for the usage
in ipc/sem and netfilter, it does not in fact work right for the
usage in task_work and futex.
So while the 2 locks crossed problem:
spin_lock(A) spin_lock(B)
if (!spin_is_locked(B)) spin_unlock_wait(A)
foo() foo();
... works with the smp_mb() injected by both spin_is_locked() and
spin_unlock_wait(), this is not sufficient for:
flag = 1;
smp_mb(); spin_lock()
spin_unlock_wait() if (!flag)
// add to lockless list
// iterate lockless list
... because in this scenario, the store from spin_lock() can be delayed
past the load of flag, uncrossing the variables and loosing the
guarantee.
This patch reworks spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait() to work in
both cases by exploiting the observation that while the lock byte
store can be delayed, the contender must have registered itself
visibly in other state contained in the word.
It also allows for architectures to override both functions, as PPC
and ARM64 have an additional issue for which we currently have no
generic solution.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.2 and later
Fixes: 54cf809b95 ("locking,qspinlock: Fix spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait()")
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2c61002271